Issues to be considered in counting burrows as a measure of Atlantic ghost crab populations, an important bioindicator of sandy beaches.

The use of indirect estimates of ghost-crab populations to assess beach disturbance has several advantages, including non-destructiveness, ease and low cost, although this strategy may add some degree of noise to estimates of population parameters. Resolution of these shortcomings may allow wider use of these populations as an indicator of differences in quality among beaches. This study analyzed to what extent the number of crab burrows may diverge from the number of animals, considering beach morphology, burrow depth and signs of occupation as contributing factors or indicators of a higher or lower occupation rate. We estimated the occupation rate of crabs in burrows on nine low-use beaches, which were previously categorized as dissipative, intermediate or reflexive. Three random 2-m-wide transects were laid perpendicular to the shoreline, where burrows were counted and excavated to search for crabs. The depth and signs of recent activity around the burrows were also recorded. The occupation rate differed on the different beaches, but morphodynamics was not identified as a grouping factor. A considerable number of burrows that lacked signs of recent activity proved to be occupied, and the proportions of these burrows also differed among beaches. Virtually all burrows less than 10 cm deep were unoccupied; the occupation rate tended to increase gradually to a burrow depth of 20-35 cm. Other methods (water, smoke, and traps) were applied to measure the effectiveness of excavating as a method for burrow counts. Traps and excavation proved to be the best methods. These observations illustrate the possible degree of unreliability of comparisons of beaches based on indirect measures. Combining burrow depth assessment with surrounding signs of occupation proved to be a useful tool to minimize biases.