Biological Sciences (M/C 066), University of Illinois at Chicago, 3346 SES, 845 W. Taylor Street, Chicago, IL 60607, USA.
Conserv Biol. 2012 Jun;26(3):557-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01825.x. Epub 2012 Mar 22.
Citizen science may be especially effective in urban landscapes due to the large pool of potential volunteers. However, there have been few evaluations of the contributions of citizen scientists to knowledge of biological communities in and around cities. To assess the effectiveness of citizen scientists' monitoring of species in urban areas, we compared butterfly data collected over 10 years in Chicago, Illinois (U.S.A.), and New York City, New York (U.S.A.). The dates, locations, and methods of data collection in Chicago were standardized, whereas data from New York were collected at any location at any time. For each city, we evaluated whether the number of observers, observation days (days on which observations were reported), and sampling locations were associated with the reported proportion of the estimated regional pool of butterfly species. We also compared the number of volunteers, duration of volunteer involvement, and consistency of sampling efforts at individual locations within each city over time. From 2001 to 2010, there were 73 volunteers in Chicago and 89 in New York. During this period, volunteers observed 86% and 89% of the estimated number of butterfly species present in Chicago and New York, respectively. Volunteers in New York reported a greater proportion of the estimated pool of butterfly species per year. In addition, more species were observed per volunteer and observation day in New York, largely due to the unrestricted sampling season in New York. Chicago volunteers were active for more years and monitored individual locations more consistently over time than volunteers in New York. Differences in monitoring protocol--especially length of sampling season and selection protocol for monitoring locations--influenced the relationship between species accrual and sampling effort, which suggests these factors are important in volunteer-based species-monitoring programs.
公民科学在城市景观中可能特别有效，因为有大量的潜在志愿者。然而，对于公民科学家对城市及其周边生物群落知识的贡献，评价甚少。为了评估公民科学家监测城市物种的有效性，我们比较了在美国伊利诺伊州芝加哥和纽约市收集的 10 年蝴蝶数据。芝加哥的数据收集日期、地点和方法标准化，而纽约的数据在任何时间和任何地点收集。对于每个城市，我们评估了观察员人数、观察天数（报告观察结果的天数）和采样地点是否与报告的估计区域蝴蝶物种库的比例有关。我们还比较了每个城市内各个地点的志愿者人数、志愿者参与时间的长短和采样工作的一致性。2001 年至 2010 年，芝加哥有 73 名志愿者，纽约有 89 名志愿者。在此期间，志愿者分别观察到芝加哥和纽约估计存在的蝴蝶物种的 86%和 89%。纽约的志愿者每年报告的估计蝴蝶物种库的比例更高。此外，由于纽约的采样季节不受限制，纽约的每个志愿者和观察日观察到的物种更多。与纽约相比，芝加哥的志愿者更活跃，并且随着时间的推移更一致地监测各个地点。监测方案的差异——尤其是采样季节的长短和监测地点的选择方案——影响了物种积累和采样工作之间的关系，这表明这些因素在基于志愿者的物种监测计划中很重要。
