Cargando…

Can Occupancy–Abundance Models Be Used to Monitor Wolf Abundance?

Estimating the abundance of wild carnivores is of foremost importance for conservation and management. However, given their elusive habits, direct observations of these animals are difficult to obtain, so abundance is more commonly estimated from sign surveys or radio-marked individuals. These metho...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Latham, M. Cecilia, Latham, A. David M., Webb, Nathan F., Mccutchen, Nicole A., Boutin, Stan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25054199
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102982
_version_ 1782327750631096320
author Latham, M. Cecilia
Latham, A. David M.
Webb, Nathan F.
Mccutchen, Nicole A.
Boutin, Stan
author_facet Latham, M. Cecilia
Latham, A. David M.
Webb, Nathan F.
Mccutchen, Nicole A.
Boutin, Stan
author_sort Latham, M. Cecilia
collection PubMed
description Estimating the abundance of wild carnivores is of foremost importance for conservation and management. However, given their elusive habits, direct observations of these animals are difficult to obtain, so abundance is more commonly estimated from sign surveys or radio-marked individuals. These methods can be costly and difficult, particularly in large areas with heavy forest cover. As an alternative, recent research has suggested that wolf abundance can be estimated from occupancy–abundance curves derived from “virtual” surveys of simulated wolf track networks. Although potentially more cost-effective, the utility of this approach hinges on its robustness to violations of its assumptions. We assessed the sensitivity of the occupancy–abundance approach to four assumptions: variation in wolf movement rates, changes in pack cohesion, presence of lone wolves, and size of survey units. Our simulations showed that occupancy rates and wolf pack abundances were biased high if track surveys were conducted when wolves made long compared to short movements, wolf packs were moving as multiple hunting units as opposed to a cohesive pack, and lone wolves were moving throughout the surveyed landscape. We also found that larger survey units (400 and 576 km(2)) were more robust to changes in these factors than smaller survey units (36 and 144 km(2)). However, occupancy rates derived from large survey units rapidly reached an asymptote at 100% occupancy, suggesting that these large units are inappropriate for areas with moderate to high wolf densities (>15 wolves/1,000 km(2)). Virtually-derived occupancy–abundance relationships can be a useful method for monitoring wolves and other elusive wildlife if applied within certain constraints, in particular biological knowledge of the surveyed species needs to be incorporated into the design of the occupancy surveys. Further, we suggest that the applicability of this method could be extended by directly incorporating some of its assumptions into the modelling framework.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4108393
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41083932014-07-24 Can Occupancy–Abundance Models Be Used to Monitor Wolf Abundance? Latham, M. Cecilia Latham, A. David M. Webb, Nathan F. Mccutchen, Nicole A. Boutin, Stan PLoS One Research Article Estimating the abundance of wild carnivores is of foremost importance for conservation and management. However, given their elusive habits, direct observations of these animals are difficult to obtain, so abundance is more commonly estimated from sign surveys or radio-marked individuals. These methods can be costly and difficult, particularly in large areas with heavy forest cover. As an alternative, recent research has suggested that wolf abundance can be estimated from occupancy–abundance curves derived from “virtual” surveys of simulated wolf track networks. Although potentially more cost-effective, the utility of this approach hinges on its robustness to violations of its assumptions. We assessed the sensitivity of the occupancy–abundance approach to four assumptions: variation in wolf movement rates, changes in pack cohesion, presence of lone wolves, and size of survey units. Our simulations showed that occupancy rates and wolf pack abundances were biased high if track surveys were conducted when wolves made long compared to short movements, wolf packs were moving as multiple hunting units as opposed to a cohesive pack, and lone wolves were moving throughout the surveyed landscape. We also found that larger survey units (400 and 576 km(2)) were more robust to changes in these factors than smaller survey units (36 and 144 km(2)). However, occupancy rates derived from large survey units rapidly reached an asymptote at 100% occupancy, suggesting that these large units are inappropriate for areas with moderate to high wolf densities (>15 wolves/1,000 km(2)). Virtually-derived occupancy–abundance relationships can be a useful method for monitoring wolves and other elusive wildlife if applied within certain constraints, in particular biological knowledge of the surveyed species needs to be incorporated into the design of the occupancy surveys. Further, we suggest that the applicability of this method could be extended by directly incorporating some of its assumptions into the modelling framework. Public Library of Science 2014-07-23 /pmc/articles/PMC4108393/ /pubmed/25054199 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102982 Text en © 2014 Latham et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Latham, M. Cecilia
Latham, A. David M.
Webb, Nathan F.
Mccutchen, Nicole A.
Boutin, Stan
Can Occupancy–Abundance Models Be Used to Monitor Wolf Abundance?
title Can Occupancy–Abundance Models Be Used to Monitor Wolf Abundance?
title_full Can Occupancy–Abundance Models Be Used to Monitor Wolf Abundance?
title_fullStr Can Occupancy–Abundance Models Be Used to Monitor Wolf Abundance?
title_full_unstemmed Can Occupancy–Abundance Models Be Used to Monitor Wolf Abundance?
title_short Can Occupancy–Abundance Models Be Used to Monitor Wolf Abundance?
title_sort can occupancy–abundance models be used to monitor wolf abundance?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25054199
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102982
work_keys_str_mv AT lathammcecilia canoccupancyabundancemodelsbeusedtomonitorwolfabundance
AT lathamadavidm canoccupancyabundancemodelsbeusedtomonitorwolfabundance
AT webbnathanf canoccupancyabundancemodelsbeusedtomonitorwolfabundance
AT mccutchennicolea canoccupancyabundancemodelsbeusedtomonitorwolfabundance
AT boutinstan canoccupancyabundancemodelsbeusedtomonitorwolfabundance