Skip to content
Ecological Intelligence

Ecological evidence.
Independent perspective.
Explore Wild Lands ↗

Ecological Intelligence / Subject

population monitoring

Peer-reviewed Oceania

Dugong survey plots received a consequential unit correction

Evidence
Peer-reviewed
Geography
Gathaagudu / Shark Bay sea country, Western Australia
System
Dugong population monitoring; density plots; research corrections

WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS

A formal October 15 correction to the 2026 Wuthuga (dugong) population-status paper changes the Y-axis unit on Figures 2–5 from m² to km² and adjusts captions on Figures 2 and 4 from m⁻² to km⁻². Corrected figures now label density per square kilometer; the original article has been updated.

WHY IT MATTERS / OUR READ

Ecological monitoring depends on units that survive publication, figure exports and later citation. Anyone reusing the earlier dugong figures should update the axes and captions before interpreting densities.

CAVEATS / UNCERTAINTY

This is a correction to labeling, not a newly measured population trend or a formal retraction. The correction notice does not support inventing revised counts or claiming that field data themselves changed.

SOURCE

Raudino et al. · Frontiers in Marine Science · formal correction (15 Oct 2026)
View original evidence ↗

A Shark Bay paper's figure labels confused per-square-kilometer with per-square-meter density; the original record was updated.

Read the Wild Lands assessment →
Peer-reviewed Europe

European wildcat reproduction varied less with measured environment than expected—except in timing

Evidence
Peer-reviewed
Geography
Europe; records from Spain, France, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Hungary and Slovenia
System
Terrestrial carnivore populations

WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS

An international dataset combined multiple survey methods across Europe. Confirmed wildcat litters ranged from one to six kittens, with an observed mean of 2.09, and litter-size estimates differed strongly among survey methods. No measured environmental or anthropogenic variable had a significant effect on litter size. Births occurred from March to October, with late-April and August peaks; higher-elevation records were later and more synchronized.

WHY IT MATTERS / OUR READ

The study is a reminder that monitoring method can dominate a demographic estimate. For population models, litter size and birth timing should carry method-specific uncertainty rather than being treated as fixed species constants.

CAVEATS / UNCERTAINTY

Survey methods were heterogeneous and produced different litter-size estimates. High-elevation samples were small and geographically concentrated in north-western Spain, so elevation and latitude could not be disentangled. Reproductive rate was estimated from only 14 females in one German forest area.

SOURCE

Mammalian Biology — primary study
View original evidence ↗

A continental dataset found no significant measured environmental effects on litter size, while births occurred later and were more synchronized at higher elevations in the available data.

Read the Wild Lands assessment →

Keep exploring

Follow the systems. Find the connections.

WildlifeLandWaterOceansClimateCitiesOne HealthGovernanceMethods / Monitoring
Browse the archive →