Mark-Recapture and Mark-Resight Methods for Estimating Abundance with Remote Cameras: A Carnivore Case Study

被引:41
|
作者
Alonso, Robert S. [1 ,2 ]
McClintock, Brett T. [3 ]
Lyren, Lisa M. [4 ]
Boydston, Erin E.
Crooks, Kevin R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Colorado State Univ, Dept Fish Wildlife & Conservat Biol, Ft Collins, CO 80523 USA
[2] US Geol Survey, Western Ecol Res Ctr, Biol Resources Discipline, Thousand Oaks, CA USA
[3] NOAA, Natl Marine Fisheries Serv, Natl Marine Mammal Lab, Seattle, WA 98115 USA
[4] US Geol Survey, Western Ecol Res Ctr, Biol Resources Discipline, Carlsbad, CA USA
来源
PLOS ONE | 2015年 / 10卷 / 03期
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
AUTOMATICALLY TRIGGERED CAMERAS; CAPTURE-RECAPTURE; HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA; HOME-RANGE; POPULATION; DENSITY; MODELS; BOBCATS; INFERENCE;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0123032
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Estimating population size of Eurasian badgers (Meles Meles) using mark-recapture and mark-resight data
    Tuyttens, FAM
    Macdonald, DW
    Swait, E
    Cheeseman, CL
    JOURNAL OF MAMMALOGY, 1999, 80 (03) : 950 - 960
  • [2] Comparing fecal DNA mark-recapture to mark-resight for estimating mule deer abundance on winter range in the eastern Sierra Nevada
    Stewart, Andi M.
    Conner, Mary M.
    McKeever, Jane
    German, Dave W.
    Stephenson, Tom R.
    CALIFORNIA FISH AND WILDLIFE JOURNAL, 2022, 108 (03):
  • [3] Costs and Precision of Fecal DNA Mark-Recapture versus Traditional Mark-Resight
    Pfeiler, Stephen S.
    Conner, Mary M.
    Mckeever, Jane S.
    Stephenson, Thomas R.
    German, David W.
    Crowhurst, Rachel S.
    Prentice, Paige R.
    Epps, Clinton W.
    WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN, 2020, 44 (03): : 531 - 542
  • [4] Comparing capture-recapture, mark-resight, and spatial mark-resight models for estimating puma densities via camera traps
    Rich, Lindsey N.
    Kelly, Marcella J.
    Sollmann, Rahel
    Noss, Andrew J.
    Maffei, Leonardo
    Arispe, Rosario L.
    Paviolo, Agustin
    De Angelo, Carlos D.
    Di Blanco, Yamai E.
    Di Bitetti, Mario S.
    JOURNAL OF MAMMALOGY, 2014, 95 (02) : 382 - 391
  • [5] To catch or to sight? A comparison of demographic parameter estimates obtained from mark-recapture and mark-resight models
    K. A. Lee
    C. Huveneers
    O. Gimenez
    V. Peddemors
    R. G. Harcourt
    Biodiversity and Conservation, 2014, 23 : 2781 - 2800
  • [6] To catch or to sight? A comparison of demographic parameter estimates obtained from mark-recapture and mark-resight models
    Lee, K. A.
    Huveneers, C.
    Gimenez, O.
    Peddemors, V.
    Harcourt, R. G.
    BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, 2014, 23 (11) : 2781 - 2800
  • [7] Improved methods for estimating abundance and related demographic parameters from mark-resight data
    McClintock, Brett T.
    White, Gary C.
    Pryde, Moira A.
    BIOMETRICS, 2019, 75 (03) : 799 - 809
  • [8] A general model for the analysis of mark-resight, mark-recapture, and band-recovery data under tag loss
    Conn, PB
    Kendall, WL
    Samuel, MD
    BIOMETRICS, 2004, 60 (04) : 900 - 909
  • [9] Evaluation of paintball, mark-resight surveys for estimating mountain goat abundance
    Pauley, George R.
    Crenshaw, John G.
    WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN, 2006, 34 (05): : 1350 - 1355
  • [10] Comparing fecal DNA capture-recapture to mark-resight for estimating abundance of mule deer on winter ranges
    Stewart, Andi M.
    Conner, Mary M.
    McKeever, Jane S.
    Ellsworth, Alisa
    Crowhurst, Rachel S.
    Epps, Clinton W.
    Stephenson, Thomas R.
    JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2023, 87 (02):