Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35638187›Full record

ArticleEcology2022

Integrated animal movement and spatial capture-recapture models: Simulation, implementation, and inference.

Beth Gardner, Brett T McClintock, Sarah J Converse, Nathan J Hostetter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Beth GardnerSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9624-2981
Brett T McClintockMarine Mammal Laboratory, NOAA-NMFS Alaska Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6154-4376
Sarah J ConverseU.S. Geological Survey, Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, School of Environmental and Forest Sciences and School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3719-5441
Nathan J HostetterU.S. Geological Survey, North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Applied Ecology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6075-2157

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last decade, spatial capture-recapture (SCR) models have become widespread for estimating demographic parameters in ecological studies. However, the underlying assumptions about animal movement and space use are often not realistic. This is a missed opportunity because interesting ecological questions related to animal space use, habitat selection, and behavior cannot be addressed with most SCR models, despite the fact that the data collected in SCR studies - individual animals observed at specific locations and times - can provide a rich source of information about these processes and how they relate to demographic rates. We developed SCR models that integrated more complex movement processes that are typically inferred from telemetry data, including a simple random walk, correlated random walk (i.e., short-term directional persistence), and habitat-driven Langevin diffusion. We demonstrated how to formulate, simulate from, and fit these models with standard SCR data using data-augmented Bayesian analysis methods. We evaluated their performance through a simulation study, in which we varied the detection, movement, and resource selection parameters. We also examined different numbers of sampling occasions and assessed performance gains when including auxiliary location data collected from telemetered individuals. Across all scenarios, the integrated SCR movement models performed well in terms of abundance, detection, and movement parameter estimation. We found little difference in bias for the simple random walk model when reducing the number of sampling occasions from T = 25 to T = 15. We found some bias in movement parameter estimates under several of the correlated random walk scenarios, but incorporating auxiliary location data improved parameter estimates and significantly improved mixing during model fitting. The Langevin movement model was able to recover resource selection parameters from standard SCR data, which is particularly appealing because it explicitly links the individual-level movement process with habitat selection and population density. We focused on closed population models, but the movement models developed here can be extended to open SCR models. The movement process models could also be easily extended to accommodate additional "building blocks" of random walks, such as central tendency (e.g., territoriality) or multiple movement behavior states, thereby providing a flexible and coherent framework for linking animal movement behavior to population dynamics, density, and distribution.

Indexed as

EcosystemMovementAnimalsBayes TheoremComputer SimulationPopulation Densityabundancecapture-recaptureLangevin diffusionmovement ecologyNIMBLEpopulation ecology

Identifiers

PMID35638187
PMCPMC9787507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.