2. 外语
  3. Don’t Rely on Indirect Evidence Conservationists may be miscalculating the numbers of the threatened animals such as elephan

Don’t Rely on Indirect Evidence Conservationists may be miscalculating the numbers of the threatened animals such as elephan

admin2016-08-16  52
问题                         Don’t Rely on Indirect Evidence
    Conservationists may be miscalculating the numbers of the threatened animals such as elephants, say African and American researchers. The error occurs because of a flaw in the way they estimate animal numbers from the piles of dung(粪)the creatures leave behind.
    The mistake could lead researchers to think that there are twice as many elephants as there really are in some regions, according to Andrew Plumptre of the Wildlife Conservation Society(WCS)in New York.
    Biologist Katy Payne of Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, agrees. " We really need to know elephant numbers and the evidence that we have is quite indirect," says Payne, who electronically tracks elephants.
    Counting elephants from aeroplanes is impossible in the vast rainforests of Central Africa. So researchers often estimate elephant numbers by counting dung piles in a given area. They also need to know the rate at which dung decays. Because it’ s extremely difficult to determine these rates, however, researchers tallying(统计)elephants in one region tend to rely on standard decay rates established elsewhere.
    But researchers at the WCS have found that this decay rate varies from region to region depending on the climate and environment. Using the wrong values can lead the census astray(歧途), says Plumptre.
    He and his colleague Anthony Chifu Nchanji studied decaying elephant dung in the forests of Banyany-Mbo wildlife sanctuary(禁猎区)in Southwest Cameroon. They found that the dung decayed between 55 and 65 per cent more slowly than dung in the rainforests of neighboring Gabon. If researchers use decay rates from Gabon to count elephants in Cameroon, they would probably find more elephants than are actually around.
    This could mean estimates in Cameroonare at least twice as high as those derived from decay rates calculated locally, says Plumptre. "However accurate your dung density estimate is,the decay rate can severely affect the result. "
    Plumptre also says that the dung-pile census should be carried out over a region similar in size to an elephant’ s natural range. The usual technique of monitoring only small, protected areas distorts numbers because elephants move in and out of these regions, he says. " If the elephant population increases within the protected area, you can not determine whether it is a real increase or whether it is due to elephants moving in because they are being poached(偷猎)outside. "
    Plumptre says that similar problems may also plague other animal census studies that rely on indirect evidence such as nests, tracks or burrows(地洞).
In making an animal census study, Plumptre advises researchers not to rely on______.
选项 A、monitoring techniques
B、electrical devices
C、aeroplanes
D、indirect evidence
答案D
解析 末段讲到和利用粪便数量来估测象群数量一样，Plumptre认为依靠间接证据，例如动物的巢穴、踪迹和地洞，也会导致普查其他动物数量时产生误差。由此可知，间接的实验证据是不可取的，故选D。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/5ZUd777K
本试题收录于： 职称英语综合类A级题库职称英语分类
0

职称英语综合类A级

职称英语

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)