Spatially explicit estimates of elk population demographics in North Carolina, USA

IF 1.9 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ECOLOGY
Jessica L. Braunstein, Joseph D. Clark, Ben C. Augustine, Caleb R. Hickman, Justin McVey, Joseph Yarkovich
{"title":"Spatially explicit estimates of elk population demographics in North Carolina, USA","authors":"Jessica L. Braunstein,&nbsp;Joseph D. Clark,&nbsp;Ben C. Augustine,&nbsp;Caleb R. Hickman,&nbsp;Justin McVey,&nbsp;Joseph Yarkovich","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In an effort to restore extirpated elk to their historical range, 52 elk were reintroduced to Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GRSM) in North Carolina, USA, during 2001 and 2002. Since their reintroduction, elk numbers have increased, and elk have extended their range beyond GRSM boundaries. We used spatially explicit capture-recapture (SCR) methods based on fecal DNA to identify individual elk and estimate population abundance (<i>N</i>), apparent survival (<i>φ</i>), per capita recruitment (<i>f</i>), and population growth rate (<i>λ</i>) in western North Carolina. We walked a series of transects during 3 winter field seasons (2020–2022) and collected elk pellets encountered along those transects. We created spatially explicit capture histories and incorporated those data into both closed and open population SCR models. The top performing closed SCR models for males and females estimated density by year and as a function of the scaled distance to the nearest field, with densities decreasing as the distance increased. Combined male and female <i>N</i> were 179 elk (95% CI = 149–215) in 2020, 220 elk (95% CI = 188–256) in 2021, and 240 elk (95% CI = 207–279) in 2022. The top open population model estimated both <i>φ</i> and <i>λ</i> as functions of sex and year. The estimate of <i>φ</i> for males was 0.682 (95% CI = 0.317–0.908) during 2020–2021 and 0.339 (95% CI = 0.152–0.596) during 2021–2022 and for females was 0.953 (95% CI = 0.830–1.000) during 2020–2021 and 0.829 (95% CI = 0.601–1.000) during 2021–2022. The annual population growth rate (<i>λ</i>) for males was 1.127 (95% CI = 0.806–1.575) during 2020–2021 and 0.811 (95% CI = 0.566–1.163) during 2021–2022 and for females was 1.559 (95% CI = 1.162–2.091) during 2020–2021 and 1.122 (95% CI = 0.876–1.437) during 2021–2022. Our elk abundance estimates in areas &gt;300 m from fields were negligible, and we suggest that sampling only the areas in and adjacent to fields in the future will result in reliable but more cost-efficient population estimates. Confidence intervals for vital rate parameters were wide for our 3-year dataset, but continued annual pellet sampling will increase sample sizes for vital rate estimation and thus improve precision. If elk herd expansion on public lands is desired, we suggest habitat modification to establish open grasslands adjacent to forests.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":"89 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Wildlife Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jwmg.22733","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In an effort to restore extirpated elk to their historical range, 52 elk were reintroduced to Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GRSM) in North Carolina, USA, during 2001 and 2002. Since their reintroduction, elk numbers have increased, and elk have extended their range beyond GRSM boundaries. We used spatially explicit capture-recapture (SCR) methods based on fecal DNA to identify individual elk and estimate population abundance (N), apparent survival (φ), per capita recruitment (f), and population growth rate (λ) in western North Carolina. We walked a series of transects during 3 winter field seasons (2020–2022) and collected elk pellets encountered along those transects. We created spatially explicit capture histories and incorporated those data into both closed and open population SCR models. The top performing closed SCR models for males and females estimated density by year and as a function of the scaled distance to the nearest field, with densities decreasing as the distance increased. Combined male and female N were 179 elk (95% CI = 149–215) in 2020, 220 elk (95% CI = 188–256) in 2021, and 240 elk (95% CI = 207–279) in 2022. The top open population model estimated both φ and λ as functions of sex and year. The estimate of φ for males was 0.682 (95% CI = 0.317–0.908) during 2020–2021 and 0.339 (95% CI = 0.152–0.596) during 2021–2022 and for females was 0.953 (95% CI = 0.830–1.000) during 2020–2021 and 0.829 (95% CI = 0.601–1.000) during 2021–2022. The annual population growth rate (λ) for males was 1.127 (95% CI = 0.806–1.575) during 2020–2021 and 0.811 (95% CI = 0.566–1.163) during 2021–2022 and for females was 1.559 (95% CI = 1.162–2.091) during 2020–2021 and 1.122 (95% CI = 0.876–1.437) during 2021–2022. Our elk abundance estimates in areas >300 m from fields were negligible, and we suggest that sampling only the areas in and adjacent to fields in the future will result in reliable but more cost-efficient population estimates. Confidence intervals for vital rate parameters were wide for our 3-year dataset, but continued annual pellet sampling will increase sample sizes for vital rate estimation and thus improve precision. If elk herd expansion on public lands is desired, we suggest habitat modification to establish open grasslands adjacent to forests.

Abstract Image

美国北卡罗来纳州麋鹿人口统计的空间明确估计
为了将灭绝的麋鹿恢复到它们的历史范围,在2001年和2002年期间,美国北卡罗来纳州的大烟山国家公园(GRSM)重新引入了52头麋鹿。自从它们被重新引入以来,麋鹿的数量增加了,而且麋鹿的活动范围已经超出了GRSM的边界。本文采用基于粪便DNA的空间显式捕获-再捕获(SCR)方法对北卡罗莱纳州西部的麋鹿个体进行了鉴定,并估算了种群丰度(N)、表观存活率(φ)、人均新增数量(f)和种群增长率(λ)。我们在3个冬季野外季节(2020-2022)走了一系列的样带,并收集了沿着这些样带遇到的麋鹿颗粒。我们创建了空间明确的捕获历史,并将这些数据合并到封闭和开放的人口SCR模型中。雄性和雌性的最佳封闭SCR模型按年估算密度,并作为与最近场地的缩放距离的函数,密度随着距离的增加而降低。2020年公、母麋鹿合计为179头(95% CI = 149 ~ 215), 2021年为220头(95% CI = 188 ~ 256), 2022年为240头(95% CI = 207 ~ 279)。顶部开放人口模型估计φ和λ都是性别和年份的函数。2020-2021年期间,男性的φ估计为0.682 (95% CI = 0.317-0.908), 2021-2022年期间为0.339 (95% CI = 0.152-0.596); 2020-2021年期间,女性的φ估计为0.953 (95% CI = 0.830-1.000), 2021-2022年期间为0.829 (95% CI = 0.601-1.000)。2020-2021年雄性种群年增长率λ为1.127 (95% CI = 0.806 ~ 1.575), 2021-2022年为0.811 (95% CI = 0.566 ~ 1.163), 2020-2021年雌性种群年增长率λ为1.559 (95% CI = 1.162 ~ 2.091), 2021-2022年为1.122 (95% CI = 0.876 ~ 1.437)。我们估计的麋鹿数量在距离田野300米的区域是可以忽略不计的,我们建议在未来只对田野内和邻近的区域进行采样,这将导致可靠但更具成本效益的种群估计。对于我们的3年数据集,生命率参数的置信区间很宽,但持续的年度颗粒采样将增加生命率估计的样本量,从而提高精度。如果希望在公共土地上扩大麋鹿群,我们建议改变生境,在森林附近建立开放草原。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Wildlife Management
Journal of Wildlife Management 环境科学-动物学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
13.00%
发文量
188
审稿时长
9-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Wildlife Management publishes manuscripts containing information from original research that contributes to basic wildlife science. Suitable topics include investigations into the biology and ecology of wildlife and their habitats that has direct or indirect implications for wildlife management and conservation. This includes basic information on wildlife habitat use, reproduction, genetics, demographics, viability, predator-prey relationships, space-use, movements, behavior, and physiology; but within the context of contemporary management and conservation issues such that the knowledge may ultimately be useful to wildlife practitioners. Also considered are theoretical and conceptual aspects of wildlife science, including development of new approaches to quantitative analyses, modeling of wildlife populations and habitats, and other topics that are germane to advancing wildlife science. Limited reviews or meta analyses will be considered if they provide a meaningful new synthesis or perspective on an appropriate subject. Direct evaluation of management practices or policies should be sent to the Wildlife Society Bulletin, as should papers reporting new tools or techniques. However, papers that report new tools or techniques, or effects of management practices, within the context of a broader study investigating basic wildlife biology and ecology will be considered by The Journal of Wildlife Management. Book reviews of relevant topics in basic wildlife research and biology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信