×

Spatially explicit maximum likelihood methods for capture-recapture studies. (English) Zbl 1138.62088

Summary: Live-trapping capture-recapture studies of animal populations with fixed trap locations inevitably have a spatial component: animals close to traps are more likely to be caught than those far away. This is not addressed in conventional closed-population estimates of abundance and without the spatial component, rigorous estimates of density cannot be obtained. We propose new, flexible capture-recapture models that use the capture locations to estimate animal locations and spatially referenced capture probability. The models are likelihood-based and hence allow use of Akaike’s information criterion or other likelihood-based methods of model selection. Density is an explicit parameter, and the evaluation of its dependence on spatial or temporal covariates is therefore straightforward. Additional (nonspatial) variation in capture probability may be modeled as in conventional capture-recapture.
The method is tested by simulation, using a model in which capture probability depends only on location relative to traps. Point estimators are found to be unbiased and standard error estimators almost unbiased. The method is used to estimate the density of Red-eyed Vireos (Vireo olivaceus) from mist-netting data from the Patuxent Research Refuge, Maryland, U.S.A. Estimates agree well with those from an existing spatially explicit method based on inverse prediction. A variety of additional spatially explicit models are fitted; these include models with temporal stratification, behavioral response, and heterogeneous animal home ranges.

MSC:

62P12 Applications of statistics to environmental and related topics
62N02 Estimation in survival analysis and censored data
62F10 Point estimation
62P10 Applications of statistics to biology and medical sciences; meta analysis

Software:

secr; MARK
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Agresti, Simple capture-recapture models permitting unequal catchability and variable sampling effort, Biometrics 50 pp 494– (1994) · doi:10.2307/2533391
[2] Akaike, International Symposium on Information Theory pp 267– (1973)
[3] Alho, Logistic regression in capture-recapture models, Biometrics 46 pp 623– (1990) · Zbl 0709.62100 · doi:10.2307/2532083
[4] Brown, Multivariate calibration, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 44 pp 287– (1982) · Zbl 0511.62083
[5] Burnham , K. P. 1972 Estimation of population size in multiple capture-recapture studies when capture probabilities vary among animals Ph.D. thesis
[6] Cooch, Program MARK: A Gentle Introduction (2006)
[7] Cormack, Inference for Poisson and multinomial models for capture-recapture experiments, Biometrika 78 pp 911– (1991) · Zbl 0754.62084 · doi:10.1093/biomet/78.4.911
[8] Debord, DMath for Delphi Software Library (2004)
[9] Dorazio, Mixture models for estimating the size of a closed population when capture rates vary among individuals, Biometrics 59 pp 351– (2003) · Zbl 1210.62226 · doi:10.1111/1541-0420.00042
[10] Efford, Density estimation in live-trapping studies, Oikos 106 pp 598– (2004) · doi:10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.13043.x
[11] Efford, Density 4.0: Software for Spatially Explicit Capture-Recapture (2007)
[12] Efford, Density: Software for analysing capture-recapture data from passive detector arrays, Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 27 pp 217– (2004)
[13] Efford, A field test of two methods for density estimation, Wildlife Society Bulletin 33 pp 731– (2005) · doi:10.2193/0091-7648(2005)33[731:AFTOTM]2.0.CO;2
[14] Hayes, Radial-distance models for the line-transect method, Biometrics 39 pp 29– (1983) · Zbl 0521.62093 · doi:10.2307/2530804
[15] Horne, Selecting the best home-range model: An information-theoretic approach, Ecology 87 pp 1146– (2006) · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[1146:STBHRM]2.0.CO;2
[16] Huggins, On the statistical analysis of capture experiments, Biometrika 76 pp 133– (1989) · Zbl 0664.62115 · doi:10.1093/biomet/76.1.133
[17] Jett, A field comparison of nested grid and trapping web density estimators, Journal of Mammalogy 68 pp 888– (1987) · doi:10.2307/1381576
[18] Lee, Estimating population size via sample coverage for closed capture-recapture models, Biometrics 50 pp 88– (1994) · Zbl 0825.62761 · doi:10.2307/2533199
[19] MacLulich, A new technique of animal census, with examples, Journal of Mammalogy 32 pp 318– (1951) · doi:10.2307/1375664
[20] Norris, Nonparametric MLE under two closed capture-recapture models with heterogeneity, Biometrics 52 pp 639– (1996) · Zbl 0875.62536 · doi:10.2307/2532902
[21] Otis, Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal populations, Wildlife Monographs 62 pp 1– (1978) · Zbl 0424.62077
[22] Pledger, Unified maximum likelihood estimates for closed capture-recapture models using mixtures, Biometrics 56 pp 434– (2000) · Zbl 1060.62652 · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00434.x
[23] Sandland, Statistical inference for Poisson and multinomial models for capture-recapture experiments, Biometrika 71 pp 27– (1984) · Zbl 0537.62092
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.