ArticleEcology2022
Integration of mark-recapture and acoustic detections for unbiased population estimation in animal communities.
Article in Ecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Estimating the ecological drivers of insect abundance when detection is imperfect.The Journal of animal ecology · 2025Article
- Food webs can deliver win-win strategies for tropical agroforestry and biodiversity conservation.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025Article
- Assessing the effectiveness of acoustic signals in mark-recapture studies to estimate dolphins' population size.Current zoology · 2025Article
- Integration of mark-recapture and acoustic detections for unbiased population estimation in animal communities.Ecology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abundance estimation methods that combine several types of data are becoming increasingly common because they yield more accurate and precise parameter estimates and predictions than are possible from a single data source. These beneficial effects result from increasing sample size (through data pooling) and complementarity between different data types. Here, we test whether integrating mark-recapture data with passive acoustic detections into a joint likelihood improves estimates of population size in a multi-guild community. We compared the integrated model to a mark-recapture-only model using simulated data first and then using a data set of mist-net captures and acoustic recordings from an Afrotropical agroforest bird community. The integrated model with simulated data improved accuracy and precision of estimated population size and detection parameters. When applied to field data, the integrated model was able to produce, for each bird guild, ecologically plausible estimates of population size and detection parameters, with more precision compared with the mark-recapture model. Overall, our results show that adding acoustic data to mark-recapture analyses improves estimates of population size. With the increasing availability of acoustic recording devices, this data collection technique could readily be added to routine field protocols, leading to a cost-efficient improvement of traditional mark-recapture population estimation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.