A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populations
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 1999 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista Brasileira de Zoologia (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101-81751999000400020 |
Resumo: | The results obtained by two estimators of population sizes, MNKA and Mh, were compared for four species of small mammmals - Didelphis aurita Wied, 1826, Philander frenata (Olfers, 1818), Nectomys squamipes (Brants, 1827) and Akodon cursor (Winge, 1887) - during a long-term population study. The MNKA estimator consistently underestimated the population sizes in relation to Mh. On the other, the probabilistic estimator Mh, which reduces bias through the jackknife technique, could not be used in all cases as its assumptions were not always met. Correction factors between the estimates obtained by the two methods were calculated for the last three species, for which catchability did not vary significantly in time and that presented positive correlation between the estimates by the two models. In order to combine the adavantages of both methods for small mammal population studies, is suggested the use of probabilistic closed population models and to calculate a correction factor based in another model which allow estimates in all cases, and which provides correlated estimates. This correction factors should be used in those cases where the probabilistic model cannot be used. |
id |
SBZ-3_b9074f3d872e48eb1b290aed0f0d0123 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0101-81751999000400020 |
network_acronym_str |
SBZ-3 |
network_name_str |
Revista Brasileira de Zoologia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populationsCapture-recapturejackknife estimatorminimun number known alivepopulation sizeThe results obtained by two estimators of population sizes, MNKA and Mh, were compared for four species of small mammmals - Didelphis aurita Wied, 1826, Philander frenata (Olfers, 1818), Nectomys squamipes (Brants, 1827) and Akodon cursor (Winge, 1887) - during a long-term population study. The MNKA estimator consistently underestimated the population sizes in relation to Mh. On the other, the probabilistic estimator Mh, which reduces bias through the jackknife technique, could not be used in all cases as its assumptions were not always met. Correction factors between the estimates obtained by the two methods were calculated for the last three species, for which catchability did not vary significantly in time and that presented positive correlation between the estimates by the two models. In order to combine the adavantages of both methods for small mammal population studies, is suggested the use of probabilistic closed population models and to calculate a correction factor based in another model which allow estimates in all cases, and which provides correlated estimates. This correction factors should be used in those cases where the probabilistic model cannot be used.Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia1999-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101-81751999000400020Revista Brasileira de Zoologia v.16 n.4 1999reponame:Revista Brasileira de Zoologia (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia (SBZ)instacron:SBZ10.1590/S0101-81751999000400020info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGentile,RosanaFernandez,Fernando A.Seng2009-06-19T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0101-81751999000400020Revistahttp://calvados.c3sl.ufpr.br/ojs2/index.php/zooONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||sbz@bio.ufpr.br1806-969X0101-8175opendoar:2009-06-19T00:00Revista Brasileira de Zoologia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia (SBZ)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populations |
title |
A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populations |
spellingShingle |
A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populations Gentile,Rosana Capture-recapture jackknife estimator minimun number known alive population size |
title_short |
A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populations |
title_full |
A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populations |
title_fullStr |
A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populations |
title_full_unstemmed |
A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populations |
title_sort |
A field comparison of two capture-mark-recapture estimators of small mammal populations |
author |
Gentile,Rosana |
author_facet |
Gentile,Rosana Fernandez,Fernando A.S |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Fernandez,Fernando A.S |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Gentile,Rosana Fernandez,Fernando A.S |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Capture-recapture jackknife estimator minimun number known alive population size |
topic |
Capture-recapture jackknife estimator minimun number known alive population size |
description |
The results obtained by two estimators of population sizes, MNKA and Mh, were compared for four species of small mammmals - Didelphis aurita Wied, 1826, Philander frenata (Olfers, 1818), Nectomys squamipes (Brants, 1827) and Akodon cursor (Winge, 1887) - during a long-term population study. The MNKA estimator consistently underestimated the population sizes in relation to Mh. On the other, the probabilistic estimator Mh, which reduces bias through the jackknife technique, could not be used in all cases as its assumptions were not always met. Correction factors between the estimates obtained by the two methods were calculated for the last three species, for which catchability did not vary significantly in time and that presented positive correlation between the estimates by the two models. In order to combine the adavantages of both methods for small mammal population studies, is suggested the use of probabilistic closed population models and to calculate a correction factor based in another model which allow estimates in all cases, and which provides correlated estimates. This correction factors should be used in those cases where the probabilistic model cannot be used. |
publishDate |
1999 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
1999-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101-81751999000400020 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0101-81751999000400020 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S0101-81751999000400020 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Zoologia v.16 n.4 1999 reponame:Revista Brasileira de Zoologia (Online) instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia (SBZ) instacron:SBZ |
instname_str |
Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia (SBZ) |
instacron_str |
SBZ |
institution |
SBZ |
reponame_str |
Revista Brasileira de Zoologia (Online) |
collection |
Revista Brasileira de Zoologia (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Zoologia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia (SBZ) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||sbz@bio.ufpr.br |
_version_ |
1754820981555200000 |