利用空间捕获-再捕获分析进行密度估计:在草原土拨鼠预防森林鼠疫疫苗接种中的应用

IF 1.9 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ECOLOGY
Robin E. Russell, Daniel W. Tripp, Katherine L. D. Richgels, Tonie E. Rocke
{"title":"利用空间捕获-再捕获分析进行密度估计:在草原土拨鼠预防森林鼠疫疫苗接种中的应用","authors":"Robin E. Russell,&nbsp;Daniel W. Tripp,&nbsp;Katherine L. D. Richgels,&nbsp;Tonie E. Rocke","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22685","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Prairie dogs are notoriously difficult to enumerate, with previously methods including visual counts, mark-resight, burrow counts, and catch per unit effort. Unlike those methods, spatial capture-recapture (SCR) analyses allow for formal estimation of density along with associated estimates of uncertainty, detection probability, and the size of the average area over which an individual was detected during the study period (referred to as an activity center). Using SCR analyses, we compared density estimates as part of a field trial evaluating the effectiveness of an oral sylvatic plague vaccine in black-tailed prairie dogs (<i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i>), Gunnison's prairie dogs (<i>C. gunnisoni</i>), white-tailed prairie dogs (<i>C. leucurus</i>), and Utah prairie dogs (<i>C. parvidens</i>) at 11 study areas in the western United States. The study was designed as a matched pairs analysis that included 27 individual paired plots (54 plots), each consisting of a plot treated with vaccine baits and a plot treated with placebo baits. Overall, we captured &gt;3,000 individuals each year on these plots, and recapture rates ranged from 5–87%. For black-tailed prairie dogs, density estimates ranged from 2.7 individuals/ha (95% CI = 2.2–3.3/ha) to 77.3/ha (63.2–94.4/ha), and for Gunnison's prairie dogs, estimates ranged from 11.7/ha (10.6–12.8/ha) to 15.4/ha (14.4–16.7/ha). White-tailed prairie dogs were at their lowest density (3.3/ha, 95% CI = 2.9–3.8/ha) during the first year of the study and their highest density (14.5/ha; 13.5–15.6/ha) during the last year of the study. Utah prairie dog density estimates ranged from a low of 4.0/ha (95% CI = 3.55–4.6/ha) to a high of 20.8/ha (16.8–25.8/ha). Best-fitting models of prairie dog density indicated increasing patterns of density over time on most study plots, negative effects of plague, and positive effects of vaccination. Finally, we found low correlations between catch per unit effort estimates from previous published literature at these sites and our densities estimates. Spatial capture-recapture estimates allowed us to consistently compare treatment effects across space and time, although some exceptions are noted where we observed significant movement between plots within a pair (3 pairs) and when trapping effort between plots or years was not consistent.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":"89 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Density estimation using spatial capture-recapture analyses: application to vaccination of prairie dogs against sylvatic plague\",\"authors\":\"Robin E. Russell,&nbsp;Daniel W. Tripp,&nbsp;Katherine L. D. Richgels,&nbsp;Tonie E. Rocke\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jwmg.22685\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Prairie dogs are notoriously difficult to enumerate, with previously methods including visual counts, mark-resight, burrow counts, and catch per unit effort. Unlike those methods, spatial capture-recapture (SCR) analyses allow for formal estimation of density along with associated estimates of uncertainty, detection probability, and the size of the average area over which an individual was detected during the study period (referred to as an activity center). Using SCR analyses, we compared density estimates as part of a field trial evaluating the effectiveness of an oral sylvatic plague vaccine in black-tailed prairie dogs (<i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i>), Gunnison's prairie dogs (<i>C. gunnisoni</i>), white-tailed prairie dogs (<i>C. leucurus</i>), and Utah prairie dogs (<i>C. parvidens</i>) at 11 study areas in the western United States. The study was designed as a matched pairs analysis that included 27 individual paired plots (54 plots), each consisting of a plot treated with vaccine baits and a plot treated with placebo baits. Overall, we captured &gt;3,000 individuals each year on these plots, and recapture rates ranged from 5–87%. For black-tailed prairie dogs, density estimates ranged from 2.7 individuals/ha (95% CI = 2.2–3.3/ha) to 77.3/ha (63.2–94.4/ha), and for Gunnison's prairie dogs, estimates ranged from 11.7/ha (10.6–12.8/ha) to 15.4/ha (14.4–16.7/ha). White-tailed prairie dogs were at their lowest density (3.3/ha, 95% CI = 2.9–3.8/ha) during the first year of the study and their highest density (14.5/ha; 13.5–15.6/ha) during the last year of the study. Utah prairie dog density estimates ranged from a low of 4.0/ha (95% CI = 3.55–4.6/ha) to a high of 20.8/ha (16.8–25.8/ha). Best-fitting models of prairie dog density indicated increasing patterns of density over time on most study plots, negative effects of plague, and positive effects of vaccination. Finally, we found low correlations between catch per unit effort estimates from previous published literature at these sites and our densities estimates. Spatial capture-recapture estimates allowed us to consistently compare treatment effects across space and time, although some exceptions are noted where we observed significant movement between plots within a pair (3 pairs) and when trapping effort between plots or years was not consistent.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Wildlife Management\",\"volume\":\"89 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"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.22685\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Wildlife Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jwmg.22685","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

摘要

草原土拨鼠是出了名的难以计数的,以前的方法包括目测计数、标记视力、洞穴计数和单位捕获量。与这些方法不同,空间捕获-再捕获(SCR)分析允许对密度进行正式估计,同时对不确定性、检测概率和研究期间检测到个体的平均区域(称为活动中心)的大小进行相关估计。利用SCR分析,我们比较了在美国西部11个研究区域对黑尾草原土拨鼠(Cynomys ludovicianus)、甘尼森草原土拨鼠(C. gunnisoni)、白尾草原土拨鼠(C. leucurus)和犹他草原土拨鼠(C. parvidens)口服森林鼠疫疫苗有效性的实地试验的密度估计。该研究被设计为配对分析,包括27个单独的配对地块(54个地块),每个地块由一个用疫苗诱饵处理的地块和一个用安慰剂诱饵处理的地块组成。总的来说,我们每年在这些地块上捕获3000只个体,再捕获率在5-87%之间。黑尾土拨鼠的密度估计范围为2.7只/公顷(95% CI = 2.2-3.3 /公顷)至77.3只/公顷(63.2-94.4 /公顷),甘尼森土拨鼠的密度估计范围为11.7只/公顷(10.6-12.8 /公顷)至15.4只/公顷(14.4-16.7 /公顷)。白尾土拨鼠在研究的第一年密度最低(3.3只/公顷,95% CI = 2.9-3.8只/公顷),而在研究的第一年密度最高(14.5只/公顷;13.5-15.6 /公顷)。犹他州草原土拨鼠的密度估计从最低的4.0只/公顷(95% CI = 3.55-4.6只/公顷)到最高的20.8只/公顷(16.8-25.8只/公顷)不等。最适合的草原土拨鼠密度模型表明,在大多数研究地块上,随着时间的推移,草原土拨鼠密度呈增加趋势,鼠疫的负面影响和疫苗接种的积极影响。最后,我们发现这些地点以前发表的文献的单位努力渔获量估计值与我们的密度估计值之间的相关性很低。空间捕获-再捕获估计使我们能够在空间和时间上一致地比较处理效果,尽管我们注意到一些例外情况,即我们观察到一对(3对)中的地块之间的显著移动,以及当地块或年份之间的捕获努力不一致时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Density estimation using spatial capture-recapture analyses: application to vaccination of prairie dogs against sylvatic plague

Density estimation using spatial capture-recapture analyses: application to vaccination of prairie dogs against sylvatic plague

Prairie dogs are notoriously difficult to enumerate, with previously methods including visual counts, mark-resight, burrow counts, and catch per unit effort. Unlike those methods, spatial capture-recapture (SCR) analyses allow for formal estimation of density along with associated estimates of uncertainty, detection probability, and the size of the average area over which an individual was detected during the study period (referred to as an activity center). Using SCR analyses, we compared density estimates as part of a field trial evaluating the effectiveness of an oral sylvatic plague vaccine in black-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus), Gunnison's prairie dogs (C. gunnisoni), white-tailed prairie dogs (C. leucurus), and Utah prairie dogs (C. parvidens) at 11 study areas in the western United States. The study was designed as a matched pairs analysis that included 27 individual paired plots (54 plots), each consisting of a plot treated with vaccine baits and a plot treated with placebo baits. Overall, we captured >3,000 individuals each year on these plots, and recapture rates ranged from 5–87%. For black-tailed prairie dogs, density estimates ranged from 2.7 individuals/ha (95% CI = 2.2–3.3/ha) to 77.3/ha (63.2–94.4/ha), and for Gunnison's prairie dogs, estimates ranged from 11.7/ha (10.6–12.8/ha) to 15.4/ha (14.4–16.7/ha). White-tailed prairie dogs were at their lowest density (3.3/ha, 95% CI = 2.9–3.8/ha) during the first year of the study and their highest density (14.5/ha; 13.5–15.6/ha) during the last year of the study. Utah prairie dog density estimates ranged from a low of 4.0/ha (95% CI = 3.55–4.6/ha) to a high of 20.8/ha (16.8–25.8/ha). Best-fitting models of prairie dog density indicated increasing patterns of density over time on most study plots, negative effects of plague, and positive effects of vaccination. Finally, we found low correlations between catch per unit effort estimates from previous published literature at these sites and our densities estimates. Spatial capture-recapture estimates allowed us to consistently compare treatment effects across space and time, although some exceptions are noted where we observed significant movement between plots within a pair (3 pairs) and when trapping effort between plots or years was not consistent.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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