10.5061/DRYAD.DH7CD36
Burgar, Joanna M.
University of British Columbia
University of Victoria
Stewart, Frances E. C.
Volpe, John P.
University of Victoria
Fisher, Jason T.
University of Victoria
Burton, A. Cole
University of British Columbia
Stewart, Frances E.C.
University of Victoria
Data from: Estimating density for species conservation: comparing camera
trap spatial count models to genetic spatial capture-recapture models
Dryad
dataset
2019
Pekania pennanti
2019-07-05T00:00:00Z
2019-07-05T00:00:00Z
en
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00411
11244 bytes
1
CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication
Density estimation is integral to the effective conservation and
management of wildlife. Camera traps in conjunction with spatial
capture-recapture (SCR) models have been used to accurately and precisely
estimate densities of “marked” wildlife populations comprising
identifiable individuals. The emergence of spatial count (SC) models holds
promise for cost-effective density estimation of “unmarked” wildlife
populations when individuals are not identifiable. We evaluated model
agreement, precision, and survey costs, between i) a fully marked approach
using SCR models fit using non-invasive genetic data, and ii) an unmarked
approach using SC models fit using camera trap data, for a recovering
population of the mesocarnivore fisher (Pekania pennanti). The SCR density
estimates ranged from 2.95 to 3.42 (2.18–5.19 95% BCI) fishers 100 km−2.
The SC density estimates were influenced by their priors, ranging from
0.95 (0.65–2.95 95% BCI) fishers 100 km−2 for the uninformative model to
3.60 (2.01–7.55 95% BCI) fishers 100 km−2 for the model informed by prior
knowledge of a 16 km2 fisher home range. We caution against using strongly
informative priors but instead recommend using a range of unweighted prior
knowledge. Thin detection data was problematic for both SCR and SC models,
potentially producing biased low estimates. The total cost of the genetic
survey ($47 610) was two-thirds of the camera trap survey ($77 080), or
comparable ($75 746) if genetic sampling effort was increased to include
sex and trap-behaviour covariates in SCR models. Density estimation of
unmarked populations continues to be a series of trade-offs but as methods
improve and integrate, so will our estimates.
Trap Deployment File (TDF)Site location dataTDF.csvEncounter Data File
(EDF)Individual encounter histories for SCR models.edf.csvFisher Camera
DetectionsUnmarked fisher camera detection dataFisher_60min2016_matrix.csv
Canada