Dataset Information

Robustness of close-kin mark-recapture estimators to dispersal limitation and spatially varying sampling probabilities.

ABSTRACT: Close-kin mark-recapture (CKMR) is a method for estimating abundance and vital rates from kinship relationships observed in genetic samples. CKMR inference only requires animals to be sampled once (e.g., lethally), potentially widening the scope of population-level inference relative to traditional monitoring programs.One assumption of CKMR is that, conditional on individual covariates like age, all animals have an equal probability of being sampled. However, if genetic data are collected opportunistically (e.g., via hunters or fishers), there is potential for spatial variation in sampling probability that can bias CKMR estimators, particularly when genetically related individuals stay in close proximity.We used individual-based simulation to investigate consequences of dispersal limitation and spatially biased sampling on performance of naive (nonspatial) CKMR estimators of abundance, fecundity, and adult survival. Population dynamics approximated that of a long-lived mammal species subject to lethal sampling.Naive CKMR abundance estimators were relatively unbiased when dispersal was unconstrained (i.e., complete mixing) or when sampling was random or subject to moderate levels of spatial variation. When dispersal was limited, extreme variation in spatial sampling probabilities negatively biased abundance estimates. Reproductive schedules and survival were well estimated, except for survival when adults could emigrate out of the sampled area. Incomplete mixing was readily detected using Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests.Although CKMR appears promising for estimating abundance and vital rates with opportunistically collected genetic data, care is needed when dispersal limitation is coupled with spatially biased sampling. Fortunately, incomplete mixing is easily detected with adequate sample sizes. In principle, it is possible to devise and fit spatially explicit CKMR models to avoid bias under dispersal limitation, but development of such models necessitates additional complexity (and possibly additional data). We suggest using simulation studies to examine potential bias and precision of proposed modeling approaches prior to implementing a CKMR program.

SUBMITTER: Conn PB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7319163 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Robustness of close-kin mark-recapture estimators to dispersal limitation and spatially varying sampling probabilities.

Conn Paul B PB Bravington Mark V MV Baylis Shane S Ver Hoef Jay M JM

Ecology and evolution 20200505 12

Close-kin mark-recapture (CKMR) is a method for estimating abundance and vital rates from kinship relationships observed in genetic samples. CKMR inference only requires animals to be sampled once (e.g., lethally), potentially widening the scope of population-level inference relative to traditional monitoring programs.One assumption of CKMR is that, conditional on individual covariates like age, all animals have an equal probability of being sampled. However, if genetic data are collected opport ...[more]

PMID: 32607174

Similar Datasets

Project description:Obtaining robust estimates of population abundance is a central challenge hindering the conservation and management of many threatened and exploited species. Close-kin mark-recapture (CKMR) is a genetics-based approach that has strong potential to improve the monitoring of data-limited species by enabling estimates of abundance, survival, and other parameters for populations that are challenging to assess. However, CKMR models have received limited sensitivity testing under realistic population dynamics and sampling scenarios, impeding the application of the method in population monitoring programs and stock assessments. Here, we use individual-based simulation to examine how unmodeled population dynamics and aging uncertainty affect the accuracy and precision of CKMR parameter estimates under different sampling strategies. We then present adapted models that correct the biases that arise from model misspecification. Our results demonstrate that a simple base-case CKMR model produces robust estimates of population abundance with stable populations that breed annually; however, if a population trend or non-annual breeding dynamics are present, or if year-specific estimates of abundance are desired, a more complex CKMR model must be constructed. In addition, we show that CKMR can generate reliable abundance estimates for adults from a variety of sampling strategies, including juvenile-focused sampling where adults are never directly observed (and aging error is minimal). Finally, we apply a CKMR model that has been adapted for population growth and intermittent breeding to two decades of genetic data from juvenile lemon sharks (Negaprion brevirostris) in Bimini, Bahamas, to demonstrate how application of CKMR to samples drawn solely from juveniles can contribute to monitoring efforts for highly mobile populations. Overall, this study expands our understanding of the biological factors and sampling decisions that cause bias in CKMR models, identifies key areas for future inquiry, and provides recommendations that can aid biologists in planning and implementing an effective CKMR study, particularly for long-lived data-limited species.

Project description:Camera trapping is the standard field method of monitoring cryptic, low-density mammal populations. Typically, researchers run camera surveys for 60 to 90 days and estimate density using closed population spatially explicit capture-recapture (SCR) models. The SCR models estimate density, capture probability (g0), and a scale parameter (?) that reflects ranging behaviour. We used a year of camera data from 20 camera stations to estimate the density of male jaguars (Panthera onca) in the Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary in Belize, using closed population SCR models. We subsampled the dataset into 276 90-day sessions and 186 180-day sessions. Estimated density fluctuated from 0.51 to 5.30 male jaguars / 100 km2 between the 90-day sessions, with comparatively robust and precise estimates for the 180-day sessions (0.73 to 3.75 male jaguars / 100 km2). We explain the variation in density estimates from the 90-day sessions in terms of temporal variation in social behaviour, specifically male competition and mating events during the three-month wet season. Density estimates from the 90-day sessions varied with ?, but not with the number of individuals detected, suggesting that variation in density was almost fully attributable to changes in estimated ranging behaviour. We found that the models overestimated ? when compared to the mean ranging distance derived from GPS tracking data from two collared individuals in the camera grid. Overestimation of ? when compared to GPS collar data was more pronounced for the 180-day sessions than the 90-day sessions. We conclude that one-off ('snap-shot') short-term, small-scale camera trap surveys do not sufficiently sample wide-ranging large carnivores. When using SCR models to estimate the density from these data, we caution against the use of poor sampling designs and/or misinterpretation of scope of inference. Although the density estimates from one-off, short-term, small-scale camera trap surveys may be statistically accurate within each short-term sampling period, the variation between density estimates from multiple sessions throughout the year illustrate that the estimates obtained should be carefully interpreted and extrapolated, because different factors, such as temporal stochasticity in behaviour of a few individuals, may have strong repercussions on density estimates. Because of temporal variation in behaviour, reliable density estimates will require larger samples of individuals and spatial recaptures than those presented in this study (mean +/- SD = 14.2 +/- 1.2 individuals, 37.7 +/- 4.7 spatial recaptures, N = 276 sessions), which are representative of, or higher than published sample sizes. To satisfy the need for larger samples, camera surveys will need to be more expansive with a higher density of stations. In the absence of this, we advocate longer sampling periods and subsampling through time as a means of understanding and describing stability or variation between density estimates.

Project description:Mark-recapture estimators are commonly used for population size estimation, and typically yield unbiased estimates for most solitary species with low to moderate home range sizes. However, these methods assume independence of captures among individuals, an assumption that is clearly violated in social species that show fission-fusion dynamics, such as the Asian elephant. In the specific case of Asian elephants, doubts have been raised about the accuracy of population size estimates. More importantly, the potential problem for the use of mark-recapture methods posed by social organization in general has not been systematically addressed. We developed an individual-based simulation framework to systematically examine the potential effects of type of social organization, as well as other factors such as trap density and arrangement, spatial scale of sampling, and population density, on bias in population sizes estimated by POPAN, Robust Design, and Robust Design with detection heterogeneity. In the present study, we ran simulations with biological, demographic and ecological parameters relevant to Asian elephant populations, but the simulation framework is easily extended to address questions relevant to other social species. We collected capture history data from the simulations, and used those data to test for bias in population size estimation. Social organization significantly affected bias in most analyses, but the effect sizes were variable, depending on other factors. Social organization tended to introduce large bias when trap arrangement was uniform and sampling effort was low. POPAN clearly outperformed the two Robust Design models we tested, yielding close to zero bias if traps were arranged at random in the study area, and when population density and trap density were not too low. Social organization did not have a major effect on bias for these parameter combinations at which POPAN gave more or less unbiased population size estimates. Therefore, the effect of social organization on bias in population estimation could be removed by using POPAN with specific parameter combinations, to obtain population size estimates in a social species.

Project description:Abundance estimation of carnivore populations is difficult and has prompted the use of non-invasive detection methods, such as remotely-triggered cameras, to collect data. To analyze photo data, studies focusing on carnivores with unique pelage patterns have utilized a mark-recapture framework and studies of carnivores without unique pelage patterns have used a mark-resight framework. We compared mark-resight and mark-recapture estimation methods to estimate bobcat (Lynx rufus) population sizes, which motivated the development of a new "hybrid" mark-resight model as an alternative to traditional methods. We deployed a sampling grid of 30 cameras throughout the urban southern California study area. Additionally, we physically captured and marked a subset of the bobcat population with GPS telemetry collars. Since we could identify individual bobcats with photos of unique pelage patterns and a subset of the population was physically marked, we were able to use traditional mark-recapture and mark-resight methods, as well as the new "hybrid" mark-resight model we developed to estimate bobcat abundance. We recorded 109 bobcat photos during 4,669 camera nights and physically marked 27 bobcats with GPS telemetry collars. Abundance estimates produced by the traditional mark-recapture, traditional mark-resight, and "hybrid" mark-resight methods were similar, however precision differed depending on the models used. Traditional mark-recapture and mark-resight estimates were relatively imprecise with percent confidence interval lengths exceeding 100% of point estimates. Hybrid mark-resight models produced better precision with percent confidence intervals not exceeding 57%. The increased precision of the hybrid mark-resight method stems from utilizing the complete encounter histories of physically marked individuals (including those never detected by a camera trap) and the encounter histories of naturally marked individuals detected at camera traps. This new estimator may be particularly useful for estimating abundance of uniquely identifiable species that are difficult to sample using camera traps alone.

Dataset Information

Robustness of close-kin mark-recapture estimators to dispersal limitation and spatially varying sampling probabilities.

Publications

Robustness of close-kin mark-recapture estimators to dispersal limitation and spatially varying sampling probabilities.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets