Cargando…

A Comparative Study of Enumeration Techniques for Free-Roaming Dogs in Rural Baramati, District Pune, India

The presence of unvaccinated free-roaming dogs (FRD) amidst human settlements is a major contributor to the high incidence of rabies in countries such as India, where the disease is endemic. Estimating FRD population size is crucial to the planning and evaluation of interventions, such as mass immun...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tiwari, Harish Kumar, Vanak, Abi Tamim, O'Dea, Mark, Gogoi-Tiwari, Jully, Robertson, Ian Duncan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5977283/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29881728
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2018.00104
_version_ 1783327347154354176
author Tiwari, Harish Kumar
Vanak, Abi Tamim
O'Dea, Mark
Gogoi-Tiwari, Jully
Robertson, Ian Duncan
author_facet Tiwari, Harish Kumar
Vanak, Abi Tamim
O'Dea, Mark
Gogoi-Tiwari, Jully
Robertson, Ian Duncan
author_sort Tiwari, Harish Kumar
collection PubMed
description The presence of unvaccinated free-roaming dogs (FRD) amidst human settlements is a major contributor to the high incidence of rabies in countries such as India, where the disease is endemic. Estimating FRD population size is crucial to the planning and evaluation of interventions, such as mass immunisation against rabies. Enumeration techniques for FRD are resource intensive and can vary from simple direct counts to statistically complex capture-recapture techniques primarily developed for ecological studies. In this study we compared eight capture-recapture enumeration methods (Lincoln–Petersen’s index, Chapman’s correction estimate, Beck’s method, Schumacher-Eschmeyer method, Regression method, Mark-resight logit normal method, Huggin’s closed capture models and Application SuperDuplicates on-line tool) using direct count data collected from Shirsuphal village of Baramati town in Western India, to recommend a method which yields a reasonably accurate count to use for effective vaccination coverage against rabies with minimal resource inputs. A total of 263 unique dogs were sighted at least once over 6 observation occasions with no new dogs sighted on the 7th occasion. Besides this direct count, the methods that do not account for individual heterogeneity yielded population estimates in the range of 248–270, which likely underestimate the real FRD population size. Higher estimates were obtained using the Huggin’s M(h)-Jackknife (437 ± 33), Huggin’s M(th)-Chao (391 ± 26), Huggin’s M(h)-Chao (385 ± 30), models and Application “SuperDuplicates” tool (392 ± 20) and were considered more robust. When the sampling effort was reduced to only two surveys, the Application SuperDuplicates online tool gave the closest estimate of 349 ± 36, which is 74% of the estimated highest population of free-roaming dogs in Shirsuphal village. This method may thus be considered the most reliable method for estimating the FRD population with minimal inputs (two surveys conducted on consecutive days).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5977283
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59772832018-06-07 A Comparative Study of Enumeration Techniques for Free-Roaming Dogs in Rural Baramati, District Pune, India Tiwari, Harish Kumar Vanak, Abi Tamim O'Dea, Mark Gogoi-Tiwari, Jully Robertson, Ian Duncan Front Vet Sci Veterinary Science The presence of unvaccinated free-roaming dogs (FRD) amidst human settlements is a major contributor to the high incidence of rabies in countries such as India, where the disease is endemic. Estimating FRD population size is crucial to the planning and evaluation of interventions, such as mass immunisation against rabies. Enumeration techniques for FRD are resource intensive and can vary from simple direct counts to statistically complex capture-recapture techniques primarily developed for ecological studies. In this study we compared eight capture-recapture enumeration methods (Lincoln–Petersen’s index, Chapman’s correction estimate, Beck’s method, Schumacher-Eschmeyer method, Regression method, Mark-resight logit normal method, Huggin’s closed capture models and Application SuperDuplicates on-line tool) using direct count data collected from Shirsuphal village of Baramati town in Western India, to recommend a method which yields a reasonably accurate count to use for effective vaccination coverage against rabies with minimal resource inputs. A total of 263 unique dogs were sighted at least once over 6 observation occasions with no new dogs sighted on the 7th occasion. Besides this direct count, the methods that do not account for individual heterogeneity yielded population estimates in the range of 248–270, which likely underestimate the real FRD population size. Higher estimates were obtained using the Huggin’s M(h)-Jackknife (437 ± 33), Huggin’s M(th)-Chao (391 ± 26), Huggin’s M(h)-Chao (385 ± 30), models and Application “SuperDuplicates” tool (392 ± 20) and were considered more robust. When the sampling effort was reduced to only two surveys, the Application SuperDuplicates online tool gave the closest estimate of 349 ± 36, which is 74% of the estimated highest population of free-roaming dogs in Shirsuphal village. This method may thus be considered the most reliable method for estimating the FRD population with minimal inputs (two surveys conducted on consecutive days). Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-05-23 /pmc/articles/PMC5977283/ /pubmed/29881728 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2018.00104 Text en Copyright © 2018 Tiwari, Vanak, O'Dea, Gogoi-Tiwari and Robertson http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Veterinary Science
Tiwari, Harish Kumar
Vanak, Abi Tamim
O'Dea, Mark
Gogoi-Tiwari, Jully
Robertson, Ian Duncan
A Comparative Study of Enumeration Techniques for Free-Roaming Dogs in Rural Baramati, District Pune, India
title A Comparative Study of Enumeration Techniques for Free-Roaming Dogs in Rural Baramati, District Pune, India
title_full A Comparative Study of Enumeration Techniques for Free-Roaming Dogs in Rural Baramati, District Pune, India
title_fullStr A Comparative Study of Enumeration Techniques for Free-Roaming Dogs in Rural Baramati, District Pune, India
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Study of Enumeration Techniques for Free-Roaming Dogs in Rural Baramati, District Pune, India
title_short A Comparative Study of Enumeration Techniques for Free-Roaming Dogs in Rural Baramati, District Pune, India
title_sort comparative study of enumeration techniques for free-roaming dogs in rural baramati, district pune, india
topic Veterinary Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5977283/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29881728
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2018.00104
work_keys_str_mv AT tiwariharishkumar acomparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia
AT vanakabitamim acomparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia
AT odeamark acomparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia
AT gogoitiwarijully acomparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia
AT robertsonianduncan acomparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia
AT tiwariharishkumar comparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia
AT vanakabitamim comparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia
AT odeamark comparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia
AT gogoitiwarijully comparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia
AT robertsonianduncan comparativestudyofenumerationtechniquesforfreeroamingdogsinruralbaramatidistrictpuneindia