2020
DOI: 10.1002/ece3.6052
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Complete tag loss in capture–recapture studies affects abundance estimates: An elephant seal case study

Abstract: In capture–recapture studies, recycled individuals occur when individuals lose all of their tags and are recaptured as though they were new individuals. Typically, the effect of these recycled individuals is assumed negligible. Through a simulation‐based study of double‐tagging experiments, we examined the effect of recycled individuals on parameter estimates in the Jolly–Seber model with tag loss (Cowen & Schwarz, 2006). We validated the simulation framework using long‐term census data of elephant seals. Incl… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, data‐driven parameter redundancy in the GJSTL models disappear when there is a large n . We note that in this case of low survival and capture rates, there are large biases in parameter estimates (Malcolm‐White et al., 2020); these biases are somewhat improved by high tag retention rates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…Therefore, data‐driven parameter redundancy in the GJSTL models disappear when there is a large n . We note that in this case of low survival and capture rates, there are large biases in parameter estimates (Malcolm‐White et al., 2020); these biases are somewhat improved by high tag retention rates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…Most model developments to account for mark loss have focussed on the Jolly-Seber model (Jolly, 1965;G. Seber, 1965) for abundance estimates, where mark loss and recycling are prone to generate serious biases (Malcolm-White et al, 2020). The loss of the mark remains largely unconsidered despite an increasing use of MSCJS models in ecology, demography, management and conservation (Huntsman et al, 2020;Melnychuk et al, 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach allowed us to include all captured individuals in the model without the cost and burden of physically marking (i.e., PIT tagging) every fish. However, because untagged individuals may have unknowingly been handled multiple times during the study period, the super-population estimate generated by the POPAN model is potentially inflated (Malcolm-White et al 2020) and not presented herein. Rather, we focus on the estimates of steelhead abundance generated for each sampling occasion which were expected to be unbiased (Schwarz and Arnason 1996;Frechette et al 2016;Osterback et al 2018).…”
Section: Steelhead Abundance Growth and Condition Factormentioning
confidence: 99%