Cargando…

Are the numbers adding up? Exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models

Large carnivores are difficult to monitor because they tend to be sparsely distributed, sensitive to human activity, and associated with complex life histories. Consequently, understanding population trend and viability requires conservationists to cope with uncertainty and bias in population data....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stenglein, Jennifer L, Zhu, Jun, Clayton, Murray K, Van Deelen, Timothy R
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BlackWell Publishing Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4314269/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25691964
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.1365
_version_ 1782355316880441344
author Stenglein, Jennifer L
Zhu, Jun
Clayton, Murray K
Van Deelen, Timothy R
author_facet Stenglein, Jennifer L
Zhu, Jun
Clayton, Murray K
Van Deelen, Timothy R
author_sort Stenglein, Jennifer L
collection PubMed
description Large carnivores are difficult to monitor because they tend to be sparsely distributed, sensitive to human activity, and associated with complex life histories. Consequently, understanding population trend and viability requires conservationists to cope with uncertainty and bias in population data. Joint analysis of combined data sets using multiple models (i.e., integrated population model) can improve inference about mechanisms (e.g., habitat heterogeneity and food distribution) affecting population dynamics. However, unobserved or unobservable processes can also introduce bias and can be difficult to quantify. We developed a Bayesian hierarchical modeling approach for inference on an integrated population model that reconciles annual population counts with recruitment and survival data (i.e., demographic processes). Our modeling framework is flexible and enables a realistic form of population dynamics by fitting separate density-dependent responses for each demographic process. Discrepancies estimated from shared parameters among different model components represent unobserved additions (i.e., recruitment or immigration) or removals (i.e., death or emigration) when annual population counts are reliable. In a case study of gray wolves in Wisconsin (1980–2011), concordant with policy changes, we estimated that a discrepancy of 0% (1980–1995), −2% (1996–2002), and 4% (2003–2011) in the annual mortality rate was needed to explain annual growth rate. Additional mortality in 2003–2011 may reflect density-dependent mechanisms, changes in illegal killing with shifts in wolf management, and nonindependent censoring in survival data. Integrated population models provide insights into unobserved or unobservable processes by quantifying discrepancies among data sets. Our modeling approach is generalizable to many population analysis needs and allows for identifying dynamic differences due to external drivers, such as management or policy changes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4314269
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BlackWell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43142692015-02-17 Are the numbers adding up? Exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models Stenglein, Jennifer L Zhu, Jun Clayton, Murray K Van Deelen, Timothy R Ecol Evol Original Research Large carnivores are difficult to monitor because they tend to be sparsely distributed, sensitive to human activity, and associated with complex life histories. Consequently, understanding population trend and viability requires conservationists to cope with uncertainty and bias in population data. Joint analysis of combined data sets using multiple models (i.e., integrated population model) can improve inference about mechanisms (e.g., habitat heterogeneity and food distribution) affecting population dynamics. However, unobserved or unobservable processes can also introduce bias and can be difficult to quantify. We developed a Bayesian hierarchical modeling approach for inference on an integrated population model that reconciles annual population counts with recruitment and survival data (i.e., demographic processes). Our modeling framework is flexible and enables a realistic form of population dynamics by fitting separate density-dependent responses for each demographic process. Discrepancies estimated from shared parameters among different model components represent unobserved additions (i.e., recruitment or immigration) or removals (i.e., death or emigration) when annual population counts are reliable. In a case study of gray wolves in Wisconsin (1980–2011), concordant with policy changes, we estimated that a discrepancy of 0% (1980–1995), −2% (1996–2002), and 4% (2003–2011) in the annual mortality rate was needed to explain annual growth rate. Additional mortality in 2003–2011 may reflect density-dependent mechanisms, changes in illegal killing with shifts in wolf management, and nonindependent censoring in survival data. Integrated population models provide insights into unobserved or unobservable processes by quantifying discrepancies among data sets. Our modeling approach is generalizable to many population analysis needs and allows for identifying dynamic differences due to external drivers, such as management or policy changes. BlackWell Publishing Ltd 2015-01 2014-12-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4314269/ /pubmed/25691964 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.1365 Text en © 2014 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Stenglein, Jennifer L
Zhu, Jun
Clayton, Murray K
Van Deelen, Timothy R
Are the numbers adding up? Exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models
title Are the numbers adding up? Exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models
title_full Are the numbers adding up? Exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models
title_fullStr Are the numbers adding up? Exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models
title_full_unstemmed Are the numbers adding up? Exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models
title_short Are the numbers adding up? Exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models
title_sort are the numbers adding up? exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4314269/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25691964
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.1365
work_keys_str_mv AT stengleinjenniferl arethenumbersaddingupexploitingdiscrepanciesamongcomplementarypopulationmodels
AT zhujun arethenumbersaddingupexploitingdiscrepanciesamongcomplementarypopulationmodels
AT claytonmurrayk arethenumbersaddingupexploitingdiscrepanciesamongcomplementarypopulationmodels
AT vandeelentimothyr arethenumbersaddingupexploitingdiscrepanciesamongcomplementarypopulationmodels