ArticleEcology and evolution2024
Accounting for unobserved population dynamics and aging error in close-kin mark-recapture assessments.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combining individual and close-kin mark-recapture to design an effective wildlife population survey.Ecology · 2026Article
- Temporal Variability in Effective Size (Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Estimating Demographic Parameters for Bearded Seals,Evolutionary applications · 2024Article
- Unraveling the Complexity of theEvolutionary applications · 2024Review
- Age is not just a number: How incorrect ageing impacts close-kin mark-recapture estimates of population size.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Accounting for unobserved population dynamics and aging error in close-kin mark-recapture assessments.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Obtaining robust estimates of population abundance is a central challenge hindering the conservation and management of many threatened and exploited species. Close-kin mark-recapture (CKMR) is a genetics-based approach that has strong potential to improve the monitoring of data-limited species by enabling estimates of abundance, survival, and other parameters for populations that are challenging to assess. However, CKMR models have received limited sensitivity testing under realistic population dynamics and sampling scenarios, impeding the application of the method in population monitoring programs and stock assessments. Here, we use individual-based simulation to examine how unmodeled population dynamics and aging uncertainty affect the accuracy and precision of CKMR parameter estimates under different sampling strategies. We then present adapted models that correct the biases that arise from model misspecification. Our results demonstrate that a simple base-case CKMR model produces robust estimates of population abundance with stable populations that breed annually; however, if a population trend or non-annual breeding dynamics are present, or if year-specific estimates of abundance are desired, a more complex CKMR model must be constructed. In addition, we show that CKMR can generate reliable abundance estimates for adults from a variety of sampling strategies, including juvenile-focused sampling where adults are never directly observed (and aging error is minimal). Finally, we apply a CKMR model that has been adapted for population growth and intermittent breeding to two decades of genetic data from juvenile lemon sharks (
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.