Literature DB >> 25000765

Compensatory heterogeneity in spatially explicit capture-recapture data.

M G Efford, G Mowat.   

Abstract

Spatially explicit capture-recapture methods, used widely to estimate the abundance of large carnivores, allow for movement within home ranges during sampling. Probability of detection is a decreasing function of distance from the home range center, with one parameter for magnitude and another for spatial scale. Sex-based and other differences in home range size potentially cause heterogeneity in individual detection and bias in estimates of density. The two parameters of detection have hitherto been treated as independent, but we suggest that an inverse relation is expected when detection probability depends on time spent near the detector. Variation in the spatial scale of detection is then compensated by reciprocal variation in the magnitude parameter. We define a net measure of detection ("single-detector sampling area," a(0)), and show by simulation that its coefficient of variation (CV) is a better predictor of bias than the CV of either component or the sum of their squared CVs. In an example using the grizzly bear Ursus arctos, the estimated sex variation in a(0) was small despite large variation in each component. From the simulations, the relative bias of density estimates was generally negligible (< 5%) when CV(a(0)) < 30%. Parameterization of the detection model in terms of a(0) and spatial scale can be more parsimonious and significantly aids the biological interpretation of detection parameters.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25000765     DOI: 10.1890/13-1497.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecology        ISSN: 0012-9658            Impact factor:   5.499


  15 in total

1.  Spatial proximity moderates genotype uncertainty in genetic tagging studies.

Authors:  Ben C Augustine; J Andrew Royle; Daniel W Linden; Angela K Fuller
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-07-13       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Are Private Reserves Effective for Jaguar Conservation?

Authors:  Carmina E Gutiérrez-González; Miguel A Gómez-Ramírez; Carlos A López-González; Paul F Doherty
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-23       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Grizzly Bear Noninvasive Genetic Tagging Surveys: Estimating the Magnitude of Missed Detections.

Authors:  Jason T Fisher; Nicole Heim; Sandra Code; John Paczkowski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-07       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Consequences of severe habitat fragmentation on density, genetics, and spatial capture-recapture analysis of a small bear population.

Authors:  Sean M Murphy; Ben C Augustine; Wade A Ulrey; Joseph M Guthrie; Brian K Scheick; J Walter McCown; John J Cox
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-24       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Improving estimation of puma (Puma concolor) population density: clustered camera-trapping, telemetry data, and generalized spatial mark-resight models.

Authors:  Sean M Murphy; David T Wilckens; Ben C Augustine; Mark A Peyton; Glenn C Harper
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Do conservation strategies that increase tiger populations have consequences for other wild carnivores like leopards?

Authors:  Ujjwal Kumar; Neha Awasthi; Qamar Qureshi; Yadvendradev Jhala
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Bayesian model selection for spatial capture-recapture models.

Authors:  Soumen Dey; Mohan Delampady; Arjun M Gopalaswamy
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 2.912

8.  A Comparison of Grizzly Bear Demographic Parameters Estimated from Non-Spatial and Spatial Open Population Capture-Recapture Models.

Authors:  Jesse Whittington; Michael A Sawaya
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Dead or gone? Bayesian inference on mortality for the dispersing sex.

Authors:  Julia A Barthold; Craig Packer; Andrew J Loveridge; David W Macdonald; Fernando Colchero
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 2.912

10.  Using spatial mark-recapture for conservation monitoring of grizzly bear populations in Alberta.

Authors:  John Boulanger; Scott E Nielsen; Gordon B Stenhouse
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-03-26       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.