Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31002709›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Simulation-based validation of spatial capture-recapture models: A case study using mountain lions.

J Terrill Paterson, Kelly Proffitt, Ben Jimenez, Jay Rotella, Robert Garrott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Precision and bias of spatial capture-recapture estimates: A multi-site, multi-year Utah black bear case study.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

J Terrill PatersonDepartment of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7527-1620
Kelly ProffittMontana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bozeman, Montana, United States of America.
Ben JimenezMontana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bozeman, Montana, United States of America.
Jay RotellaDepartment of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, United States of America.
Robert GarrottDepartment of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spatial capture-recapture (SCR) models have improved the ability to estimate densities of rare and elusive animals. However, SCR models have seldom been validated even as model formulations diversify and expand to incorporate new sampling methods and/or additional sources of information on model parameters. Information on the relationship between encounter probabilities, sources of additional information, and the reliability of density estimates, is rare but crucial to assessing reliability of SCR-based estimates. We used a simulation-based approach that incorporated prior empirical work to assess the accuracy and precision of density estimates from SCR models using spatially unstructured sampling. To assess the consequences of sparse data and potential sources of bias, we simulated data under six scenarios corresponding to three different levels of search effort and two levels of correlation between search effort and animal density. We then estimated density for each scenario using four models that included increasing amounts of information from harvested individuals and telemetry to evaluate the impact of additional sources of information. Model results were sensitive to the quantity of available information: density estimates based on low search effort were biased high and imprecise, whereas estimates based on high search effort were unbiased and precise. A correlation between search effort and animal density resulted in a positive bias in density estimates, though the bias decreased with increasingly informative datasets. Adding information from harvested individuals and telemetered individuals improved density estimates based on low and moderate effort but had negligible impact for datasets resulting from high effort. We demonstrated that density estimates from SCR models using spatially unstructured sampling are reliable when sufficient information is provided. Accurate density estimates can result if empirical-based simulations such as those presented here are used to develop study designs with appropriate amounts of effort and information sources.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsComputer SimulationModels, BiologicalPopulation DensityAnimal DistributionAnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemPumaReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID31002709
PMCPMC6474654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.