<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>K.P. Kenow</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>C. E. Korschgen</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>A.F. Boysen</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>G.S. Bakken</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2000</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;Studies using mounts have an inherently nested error structure; calibration and standardization should use the appropriate procedures and statistics. One example is that individual mount differences are nested within morphological factors related to species, age, or gender; without replication, mount differences may be confused with differences due to morphology. Also, the sensitivity of mounts to orientation to wind or sun is nested within mount; without replication, inadvertent variation in mount positioning may be confused with differences among mounts. Data on heat loss from a of 1-day-old mallard duckling mount are used to illustrate orientation sensitivity.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1016/S0306-4565(99)00094-7</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Elsevier</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Statistical and procedural issues in the use of heated taxidermic mounts</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>