Reliability of different mark-recapture methods for population size estimation tested against reference population sizes constructed from field data

44Citations
Citations of this article
278Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Reliable estimates of population size are fundamental in many ecological studies and biodiversity conservation. Selecting appropriate methods to estimate abundance is often very difficult, especially if data are scarce. Most studies concerning the reliability of different estimators used simulation data based on assumptions about capture variability that do not necessarily reflect conditions in natural populations. Here, we used data from an intensively studied closed population of the arboreal gecko Gehyra variegata to construct reference population sizes for assessing twelve different population size estimators in terms of bias, precision, accuracy, and their 95%-confidence intervals. Two of the reference populations reflect natural biological entities, whereas the other reference populations reflect artificial subsets of the population. Since individual heterogeneity was assumed, we tested modifications of the Lincoln-Petersen estimator, a set of models in programs MARK and CARE-2, and a truncated geometric distribution. Ranking of methods was similar across criteria. Models accounting for individual heterogeneity performed best in all assessment criteria. For populations from heterogeneous habitats without obvious covariates explaining individual heterogeneity, we recommend using the moment estimator or the interpolated jackknife estimator (both implemented in CAPTURE/MARK). If data for capture frequencies are substantial, we recommend the sample coverage or the estimating equation (both models implemented in CARE-2). Depending on the distribution of catchabilities, our proposed multiple Lincoln-Petersen and a truncated geometric distribution obtained comparably good results. The former usually resulted in a minimum population size and the latter can be recommended when there is a long tail of low capture probabilities. Models with covariates and mixture models performed poorly. Our approach identified suitable methods and extended options to evaluate the performance of mark-recapture population size estimators under field conditions, which is essential for selecting an appropriate method and obtaining reliable results in ecology and conservation biology, and thus for sound management. © 2014 Grimm et al.

Figures

  • Table 1. Overview on all tested population size estimators including their references, basics, and model selection procedures.
  • Figure 1. Population size estimates of partly independent entities. Comparison of different methods for population size estimates with the partly independent reference population sizes (connected by a line). LP: Lincoln-Petersen; MLP: Multiple Lincoln-Petersen; MPE: Mean Petersen estimate; IntJK: Interpolated jackknife; ME: Moment estimator; SC1: Sample coverage 1; SC2: Sample coverage 2; EE: Estimating equation. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098840.g001
  • Table 2. Results for population size estimation with partly independent data.
  • Table 3. Ranking of estimators for the partly independent data.
  • Figure 2. Population size estimates of fully independent entities. Comparison of different methods for population size estimates with the fully independent reference population sizes (connected by a line). LP: Lincoln-Petersen; MLP: Multiple Lincoln-Petersen; MPE: Mean Petersen estimate; IntJK: Interpolated jackknife; ME: Moment estimator; SC1: Sample coverage 1; SC2: Sample coverage 2; EE: Estimating equation. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098840.g002
  • Table 4. Results for population size estimation with fully independent data.
  • Table 5. Ranking of estimators for the fully independent data.

References Powered by Scopus

A Generalization of Sampling Without Replacement from a Finite Universe

2856Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Estimating the population size for capture - Recapture data with unequal catchability

1858Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

On the statistical analysis of capture experiments

591Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Species Distribution Modeling for Machine Learning Practitioners: A Review

47Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Impact of hunting along the migration corridor of pink-footed geese Anser brachyrhynchus – implications for sustainable harvest management

33Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Population abundance estimation with heterogeneous encounter probabilities using numerical integration

24Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Grimm, A., Gruber, B., & Henle, K. (2014). Reliability of different mark-recapture methods for population size estimation tested against reference population sizes constructed from field data. PLoS ONE, 9(6). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098840

Readers over time

‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24010203040

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 89

68%

Researcher 26

20%

Professor / Associate Prof. 10

8%

Lecturer / Post doc 5

4%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 111

62%

Environmental Science 59

33%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 6

3%

Earth and Planetary Sciences 4

2%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0