Occupancy methods propelled the quantitative study of species distributions forward by separating the observation process, or the imperfect detectability of species, from the ecological processes of interest governing species distributions. Occupancy studies come at a cost, however: the collection of additional data to account for nondetections at sites where the species is present. The most common occupancy designs (repeated‐measures designs) require repeat visits to sites or the use of multiple observers or detection methods. Time‐to‐detection methods have been identified as a potentially efficient alternative, requiring only one visit to each site by a single observer. A comparison of time‐to‐detection methods to repeated‐measures designs for visual encounter surveys would allow researchers to evaluate whether time‐to‐detection methods might be appropriate for their study system and can inform optimal survey design. We collected time‐to‐detection data during two different repeated‐measures design occupancy surveys for four amphibians and compared the performance of time‐to‐detection methods to the other designs using the location (potential bias) and precision of posterior distributions for occurrence parameters. We further used results of time‐to‐detection surveys to optimize survey design. Time‐to‐detection methods performed best for species that are widespread and have high detection probabilities and rates, but performed less well for cryptic species with lower probability of occurrence or whose detection was strongly affected by survey conditions. In all cases, single surveys were most efficient in terms of person‐hours expended, but under some conditions the survey duration required to achieve high detection probabilities would be prohibitively long for a single survey. Regardless of occupancy survey design, time‐to‐detection methods provide important information that can be used to optimize surveys, allowing researchers and resource managers to efficiently achieve monitoring and conservation goals. Collecting time‐to‐detection data while conducting repeated‐measures occupancy surveys requires only small modifications to field methods but could have large benefits in terms of time spent surveying in the long term.

中文翻译：

---

检测时间占用方法：提高调查效率的性能和实用性

占用方法通过将观测过程或不完善的物种可检测性与控制物种分布的重要生态过程分开，从而推动了物种分布的定量研究。但是，占用研究需要付出一定的代价：要收集额外的数据，以说明在存在该物种的地点没有进行检测。最常见的占用设计（重复测量设计）需要重复访问站点或使用多个观察者或检测方法。检测时间方法已被认为是一种潜在的有效替代方法，只需要一名观察员对每个站点进行一次访问。将时间检测方法与视觉相遇调查的重复测量设计进行比较，可以使研究人员评估时间检测方法是否适合其研究系统，并可以为优化调查设计提供依据。我们在四个不同的两栖动物的两次不同的重复测量设计占用调查中收集了检测时间数据，并使用位置（潜在偏差）和后发分布精度作为发生参数，将检测时间方法与其他设计的性能进行了比较。 。我们进一步使用了检测时间调查的结果来优化调查设计。检测时间方法对于分布广泛且具有高检测概率和高检出率的物种而言效果最好，但对于发生概率较低或检测条件受到调查条件强烈影响的隐性物种，效果较差。在所有情况下，就所花费的工时而言，单项调查是最有效的，但是在某些条件下，单项调查获得高检测概率所需的调查持续时间会过长。不管占用调查的设计如何，检测时间方法都可以提供可用于优化调查的重要信息，从而使研究人员和资源管理人员可以有效地实现监测和保护目标。在进行重复测量占用率调查的同时收集检测时间数据仅需要对现场方法进行少量修改，但就长期而言，在花费的调查时间上可能会有很大的好处。