Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Compensatory heterogeneity in spatially explicit capture-recapture data
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Compensatory heterogeneity in spatially explicit capture-recapture data
Do you wish to request the book?
Compensatory heterogeneity in spatially explicit capture-recapture data
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Compensatory heterogeneity in spatially explicit capture-recapture data
2014
Overview
Spatially explicit capture-recapture methods, used widely to estimate the abundance of large carnivores, allow for movement within home ranges during sampling. Probability of detection is a decreasing function of distance from the home range center, with one parameter for magnitude and another for spatial scale. Sex-based and other differences in home range size potentially cause heterogeneity in individual detection and bias in estimates of density. The two parameters of detection have hitherto been treated as independent, but we suggest that an inverse relation is expected when detection probability depends on time spent near the detector. Variation in the spatial scale of detection is then compensated by reciprocal variation in the magnitude parameter. We define a net measure of detection (\"single-detector sampling area,\"
a
0
), and show by simulation that its coefficient of variation (CV) is a better predictor of bias than the CV of either component or the sum of their squared CVs. In an example using the grizzly bear
Ursus arctos
, the estimated sex variation in
a
0
was small despite large variation in each component. From the simulations, the relative bias of density estimates was generally negligible (<5%) when CV(
a
0
) < 30%. Parameterization of the detection model in terms of
a
0
and spatial scale can be more parsimonious and significantly aids the biological interpretation of detection parameters.
Publisher
Ecological Society of America
Subject
