Assessing trends in population size of three unmarked species: A comparison of a multi‐species N‐mixture model and random encounter models

Author:

Bollen Martijn123ORCID,Palencia Pablo45ORCID,Vicente Joaquín4ORCID,Acevedo Pelayo4ORCID,Del Río Lucía4ORCID,Neyens Thomas26ORCID,Beenaerts Natalie1ORCID,Casaer Jim3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Centre for Environmental Sciences UHasselt – Hasselt University Diepenbeek Belgium

2. Data Science Institute UHasselt – Hasselt University Diepenbeek Belgium

3. Research Institute for Nature and Forest Brussels Belgium

4. Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos (IREC) CSIC‐ UCLM‐ JCCM Ciudad Real Spain

5. Dipartamiento di Scienze Veterinarie Università Degli Studi di Torino Grugliasco Torino Italy

6. Leuven Biostatistics and statistical Bioinformatics Centre KU Leuven Leuven Belgium

Abstract

AbstractEstimation of changes in abundances and densities is essential for the research, management, and conservation of animal populations. Recently, technological advances have facilitated the surveillance of animal populations through the adoption of passive sensors, such as camera traps (CT). Several methods, including the random encounter model (REM), have been developed for estimating densities of unmarked populations but require additional information. Hierarchical abundance models, such as the N‐mixture model (NMM), can estimate abundances without performing additional fieldwork but do not explicitly estimate the area effectively sampled. This obscures the interpretation of its densities and requires its users to focus on relative measures of abundance instead. Hence, the main objective of our study is to evaluate if REM and NMM yield consistent results qualitatively. Therefore, we compare relative trends: (i) between species, (ii) between years and (iii) across years obtained from annual density/abundance estimates of three species (fox, wild boar and red deer) in central Spain monitored by a camera trapping network for five consecutive winter periods. We reveal that NMM and REM provided density estimates in the same order of magnitude for wild boar, but not for foxes and red deer. Assuming a Poisson detection process in the NMM was important to control for inflation of abundance estimates for frequently detected species. Both methods consistently ranked density/abundance across species (between species trend), but did not always agree on relative ranks of yearly estimates within a single population (between years trend), nor on its linear population trends across years (across years trend). Our results suggest that relative trends are generally consistent when the range of variability is large, but can become inconsistent when the range of variability is smaller.

Funder

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Nature and Landscape Conservation,Ecology,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3