PCI Ecology

Direct submissions to PCI Ecology from bioRxiv.org are possible using the B2J service

582

Title *

The Moa the Merrier: Resolving When the Dinornithiformes Went Extinctuse asterix (*) to get italics

Authors *

Floe FoxonPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

Year *

2023

Picture *

Abstract *

<p style="text-align: justify;">The Moa (Aves: Dinornithiformes) are an extinct group of the ratite clade from New Zealand. The overkill hypothesis asserts that the first New Zealand settlers hunted the Moa to extinction by 1450 CE, whereas the staggered survival hypothesis allows for Moa survival until after Europeans began to arrive on New Zealand. Alleged Moa sightings post-1450 CE may shed light on these competing hypotheses. A dataset of 97 alleged Moa sightings from circa 1675 CE to 1993 CE was constructed, with sightings given subjective quality ratings corresponding to various statistical probabilities. Cumulative probabilities of Moa persistence were calculated with a conservative survival model using these probabilistic sighting-records; a method recently applied to sightings of the Thylacine. Cumulative persistence probability fell sharply after 1408 CE, and across pessimistic and optimistic variations of the model, it was more likely than not that the Moa were extinct by 1770 CE. Probabilistic sighting-record models favour the overkill hypothesis, and give very low probabilities of Moa persistence around the time of European arrival. Eyewitness data on Moa sightings are amenable to scientific study, and these methods may be applied to similar animals.</p>

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these data (if you have any problems with the deposit of your data, please contact contact@ecology.peercommunityin.org). In case all raw data are included in the preprint, indicate the DOI or URL of the preprint. *

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/E59H6You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these scripts (if you have any problems with the deposit of your scripts, please contact contact@ecology.peercommunityin.org). In case all raw scripts are included in the preprint, indicate the DOI or URL of the preprint. *

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/E59H6You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI, SWHID or URL) giving public access to these codes (if you have any problems with the deposit of your codes, please contact contact@ecology.peercommunityin.org). In case all raw codes are included in the preprint, indicate the DOI or URL of the preprint. *

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/E59H6You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Keywords (optional)

Extinction inference; Moa; Dinornithiformes; Extinction Dynamics; Citizen Science; Overkill hypothesis; Folk Zoology; Hidden Animals; Cryptozoology

Methods that require specific expertise (optional)

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Thematic fields *

Conservation biology, Human impact, Statistical ecology, Zoology

Suggested reviewers - Suggest up to 10 reviewers (provide names and Email addresses). (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

No need for them to be recommenders of PCIEcology. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

Opposed reviewers - Suggest up to 5 people not to invite as reviewers. (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

Submission date

2023-08-08 17:14:30

Recommender

Werner Ulrich

Reviewers

Tim Coulson, Richard Holdaway

or Register
Submit a preprint