scholarly journals How Does Spatial Study Design Influence Density Estimates from Spatial Capture-Recapture Models?

PLoS ONE ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. e34575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahel Sollmann ◽  
Beth Gardner ◽  
Jerrold L. Belant
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soumen Dey ◽  
Richard Bischof ◽  
Pierre P. A. Dupont ◽  
Cyril Milleret

AbstractSpatial capture-recapture (SCR) is now used widely to estimate wildlife densities. At the core of SCR models lies the detection function, linking individual detection probability to the distance from its latent activity center. The most common function (half-normal) assumes a bivariate normal space use and consequently detection pattern. This is likely an oversimplification and misrepresentation of real-life animal space use patterns, but studies have reported that density estimates are relatively robust to misspecified detection functions. However, information about consequences of such misspecification on space use parameters (e.g. home range area), as well as diagnostic tools to reveal it are lacking.We simulated SCR data under six different detection functions, including the half-normal, to represent a wide range of space use patterns. We then fit three different SCR models, with the three simplest detection functions (half-normal, exponential and half-normal plateau) to each simulated data set. We evaluated the consequences of misspecification in terms of bias, precision and coverage probability of density and home range area estimates. We also calculated Bayesian p-values with respect to different discrepancy metrics to assess whether these can help identify misspecifications of the detection function.We corroborate previous findings that density estimates are robust to misspecifications of the detection function. However, estimates of home range area are prone to bias when the detection function is misspecified. When fitted with the half-normal model, average relative bias of 95% kernel home range area estimates ranged between −25% and 26% depending on the misspecification. In contrast, the half-normal plateau model (an extension of the half-normal) returned average relative bias that ranged between −26% and −4%. Additionally, we found useful heuristic patterns in Bayesian p-values to diagnose the misspecification in detection function.Our analytical framework and diagnostic tools may help users select a detection function when analyzing empirical data, especially when space use parameters (such as home range area) are of interest. We urge development of additional custom goodness of fit diagnostics for Bayesian SCR models to help practitioners identify a wider range of model misspecifications.


Author(s):  
Jason Fisher ◽  
Joanna Burgar ◽  
Melanie Dickie ◽  
Cole Burton ◽  
Rob Serrouya

Density estimation is a key goal in ecology but accurate estimates remain elusive, especially for unmarked animals. Data from camera-trap networks combined with new density estimation models can bridge this gap but recent research has shown marked variability in accuracy, precision, and concordance among estimators. We extend this work by comparing estimates from two different classes of models: unmarked spatial capture-recapture (spatial count, SC) models, and Time In Front of Camera (TIFC) models, a class of random encounter model. We estimated density for four large mammal species with different movement rates, behaviours, and sociality, as these traits directly relate to model assumptions. TIFC density estimates were typically higher than SC model estimates for all species. Black bear TIFC estimates were ~ 10-fold greater than SC estimates. Caribou TIFC estimates were 2-10 fold greater than SC estimates. White-tailed deer TIFC estimates were up to 100-fold greater than SC estimates. Differences of 2-5 fold were common for other species in other years. SC estimates were annually stable except for one social species; TIFC estimates were highly annually variable in some cases and consistent in others. Tests against densities obtained from DNA surveys and aerial surveys also showed variable concordance and divergence. For gregarious animals TIFC may outperform SC due to the latter model’s assumption of independent activity centres. For curious animals likely to investigate camera traps, SC may outperform TIFC, which assumes animal behavior is unaffected by cameras. Unmarked models offer great possibilities, but a pragmatic approach employs multiple estimators where possible, considers the ecological plausibility of assumptions, and uses an informed multi-inference approach to seek estimates from models with assumptions best fitting a species’ biology.


Author(s):  
Mitchell Alan Parsons ◽  
ALISHIA ORLOFF ◽  
Laura Prugh

Density estimates are integral to wildlife management, but they can be costly to obtain. Indices of density may provide efficient alternatives, but calibration is needed to ensure the indices accurately reflect density. We evaluated several indices of small mammal density using live trapping and motion-activated cameras in Washington’s Cascade Mountains. We used linear regression to compare spatially-explicit capture recapture density estimates of mice, voles, and chipmunks to four indices. Two indices were based on live trapping (minimum number alive and number of captures per 100 trap nights) and two indices were based on photos from motion-activated cameras (proportion of cameras detecting a species and the number of independent detections). We evaluated how the accuracy of trap-based indices increased with trapping effort using subsets of the full dataset (n = 7 capture occasions per site). Most indices provided reliable indicators of small mammal density, and live trapping indices (R2=0.64 – 0.98) outperformed camera-based indices (R2=0.24 – 0.86). All indices performed better for more abundant species. The effort required to estimate each index varied, and indices that required more effort performed better. These findings should help managers, conservation practitioners, and researchers select small mammal monitoring methods that best fit their needs.


Oryx ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 536-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahel Sollmann ◽  
Matthew Linkie ◽  
Iding A. Haidir ◽  
David W. Macdonald

AbstractWe use data from camera-trap surveys for tigers Panthera tigris in combination with spatial capture–recapture models to provide the first density estimates for the Sunda clouded leopard Neofelis diardi on Sumatra. Surveys took place during 2004–2007 in the Kerinci landscape. Densities were 0.385–1.278 per 100 km2. We found no statistically significant differences in density among four study sites or between primary and mixed forest. Because the data sets are too small to account for differences in detection parameters between sexes, density is probably underestimated. Estimates are comparable to previous estimates of 1–2 per 100 km2 from the lowlands of central Sabah, on Borneo. Data limitations suggest that camera-trap surveys for Sunda clouded leopards require traps spaced more closely, to increase the chance of recaptures at different traps. Nevertheless, these first density estimates for clouded leopards on Sumatra provide a benchmark for measuring future conservation impact on an island that is undergoing rapid forest loss.


Oryx ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 423-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Wilting ◽  
Azlan Mohamed ◽  
Laurentius N. Ambu ◽  
Peter Lagan ◽  
Sam Mannan ◽  
...  

AbstractRecently the Sunda clouded leopard Neofelis diardi was recognized as a separate species distinct from the clouded leopard Neofelis nebulosa of mainland Asia. Both species are categorized as Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. Little is known about the newly identified species and, in particular, information from forests outside protected areas is scarce. Here we present one of the first density estimates calculated with spatial capture–recapture models using camera-trap data. In two commercial forest reserves in Sabah (both certified for their sustainable management practices) the density of the Sunda clouded leopard was estimated to be c. 1 per 100 km2 (0.84±SE 0.42 and 1.04±SE 0.58). The presence of the Sunda clouded leopard in such forests is encouraging for its conservation but additional studies from other areas, including protected forests, are needed to compare and evaluate these densities.


1987 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Sterling D. Miller ◽  
Earl F. Becker ◽  
Warren B. Ballard

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn S. Williams ◽  
Samual T. Williams ◽  
Rebecca J. Welch ◽  
Courtney J. Marneweck ◽  
Gareth K. H. Mann ◽  
...  

AbstractWildlife population density estimates provide information on the number of individuals in an area and influence conservation management decisions. Thus, accuracy is vital. A dominant feature in many landscapes globally is fencing, yet the implications of fence permeability on density estimation using spatial capture-recapture modelling are seldom considered. We used camera trap data from 15 fenced reserves across South Africa to examine the density of brown hyaenas (Parahyaena brunnea). We estimated density and modelled its relationship with a suite of covariates when fenced reserve boundaries were assumed to be permeable or impermeable to hyaena movements. The best performing models were those that included only the influence of study site on both hyaena density and detection probability, regardless of assumptions of fence permeability. When fences were considered impermeable, densities ranged from 2.55 to 15.06 animals per 100 km2, but when fences were considered permeable, density estimates were on average 9.52 times lower (from 0.17 to 1.59 animals per 100 km2). Fence permeability should therefore be an essential consideration when estimating density, especially since density results can considerably influence wildlife management decisions. In the absence of strong evidence to the contrary, future studies in fenced areas should assume some degree of permeability in order to avoid overestimating population density.


2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-33
Author(s):  
P. Sarmento ◽  
◽  
J. Cruz ◽  
C. Eira ◽  
C. Fonseca ◽  
...  

Many species that occur at low densities are not accurately estimated using capture–recapture methods as such techniques assume that populations are well–defined in space. To solve this bias, spatially explicit capture–recapture (SECR) models have recently been developed. These models incorporate movement and can identify areas where it is more likely for individuals to concentrate their activity. In this study, we used data from camera–trap surveys of common genets (Genetta genetta) in Serra da Malcata (Portugal), designed to compare abundance estimates produced by SECR models with traditional closed–capture models. Using the SECR models, we observed spatial heterogeneity in genet distribution and density estimates were approximately two times lower than those obtained from the closed population models. The non–spatial model estimates were constrained to sampling grid size and likely underestimated movements, thereby overestimating density. Future research should consider the incorporation of cost–weighed models that can include explicit hypothesis on how environmental variables influence the distance metric.


2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter D. Alexander ◽  
Eric M. Gese

Context Several studies have estimated cougar (Puma concolor) abundance using remote camera trapping in conjunction with capture–mark–recapture (CMR) type analyses. However, this methodology (photo-CMR) requires that photo-captured individuals are individually recognisable (photo identification). Photo identification is generally achieved using naturally occurring marks (e.g. stripes or spots) that are unique to each individual. Cougars, however, are uniformly pelaged, and photo identification must be based on subtler attributes such as scars, ear nicks or body morphology. There is some debate as to whether these types of features are sufficient for photo-CMR, but there is little research directly evaluating its feasibility with cougars. Aim We aimed to examine researchers’ ability to reliably identify individual cougars in photographs taken from a camera-trapping survey, in order to evaluate the appropriateness of photo-CMR for estimating cougar abundance or CMR-derived parameters. Methods We collected cougar photo detections using a grid of 55 remote camera traps in north-west Wyoming, USA. The photo detections were distributed to professional biologists working in cougar research, who independently attempted to identify individuals in a pairwise matching process. We assessed the level to which their results agreed, using simple percentage agreement and Fleiss’s kappa. We also generated and compared spatially explicit capture–recapture (SECR) density estimates using their resultant detection histories. Key results There were no cases where participants were in full agreement on a cougar’s ID. Agreement in photo identification among participants was low (n = 7; simple agreement = 46.7%; Fleiss’s kappa = 0.183). The resultant SECR density estimates ranged from 0.7 to 13.5 cougars per 100 km2 (n = 4; s.d. = 6.11). Conclusion We were unable to produce reliable estimates of cougar density using photo-CMR, due to our inability to accurately photo-tag detected individuals. Abundance estimators that do not require complete photo-tagging (i.e. mark–resight) were also infeasible, given the lack of agreement on any single cougar’s ID. Implications This research suggested that there are substantial problems with the application of photo-CMR to estimate the size of cougar populations. Although improvements in camera technology or field methods may resolve these issues, researchers attempting to use this method on cougars should be cautious.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gates Dupont ◽  
J. Andrew Royle ◽  
Muhammad Ali Nawaz ◽  
Chris Sutherland

AbstractSpatial capture-recapture (SCR) has emerged as the industry standard for estimating population density by leveraging information from spatial locations of repeat encounters of individuals. The precision of density estimates depends fundamentally on the number and spatial configuration of traps. Despite this knowledge, existing sampling design recommendations are heuristic and their performance remains untested for most practical applications. To address this issue, we propose a genetic algorithm that minimizes any sensible, criteria-based objective function to produce near-optimal sampling designs. To motivate the idea of optimality, we compare the performance of designs optimized using three model-based criteria related to the probability of capture. We use simulation to show that these designs out-perform those based on existing recommendations in terms of bias, precision, and accuracy in the estimation of population size. Our approach allows conservation practitioners and researchers to generate customized and improved sampling designs for wildlife monitoring.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document