Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Costs and Precision of Fecal DNA Mark–Recapture versus Traditional Mark–Resight

View through CrossRef
ABSTRACT Wildlife managers often need to estimate population abundance to make well‐informed decisions. However, obtaining such estimates can be difficult and costly, particularly for species with small populations, wide distributions, and spatial clustering of individuals. For this reason, DNA surveys and capture–recapture modeling has become increasingly common where direct observation is consistently difficult or counts are small or variable. We compared the precision, as indicated by the coefficient of variation (CV), and cost‐effectiveness of 2 methods to estimate abundance of desert bighorn sheep ( Ovis canadensis nelsoni ) populations: traditional ground‐based mark–resight and fecal DNA capture–recapture. In the Marble Mountains in the Mojave Desert of southeastern California, USA, we conducted annual ground‐based mark–resight surveys and collected fecal samples at water sources concurrently during the dry seasons (Jun–Jul) of 2016 and 2017. Fecal DNA samples were genotyped to identify unique individuals. The Lincoln–Peterson bias‐corrected estimator and Huggins closed‐capture recapture models were used to estimate abundance for the ground‐based mark resight and fecal DNA capture–recapture, respectively. We compared costs between the 2 methods for our study and used simulations to estimate costs for a variety of possible sampling scenarios for our study system based on field‐based estimates. Population abundance estimates from fecal DNA capture–recapture achieved much greater precision (CV = 5–7%) than estimates derived from ground‐based mark–resight (CV = 21–56%). Our simulations indicated that for a population of 100, 2 sampling occasions, and resight probability of 0.20, the lowest CV obtained by mark–resight was approximately 12%. We predict the cost of abundance estimates for this level of precision (CV = 12%) from fecal DNA capture–recapture would be 28% of the cost of ground‐based mark–resight (i.e., a 72% cost reduction). We conclude that fecal DNA capture–recapture is a highly cost‐effective alternative for estimating abundance of relatively small populations (≤300) of desert bighorn sheep. More broadly, integrating simulated study designs with cost analyses provides a tool to identify the most effective method for estimating abundance over a wide variety of sampling scenarios. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.
Title: Costs and Precision of Fecal DNA Mark–Recapture versus Traditional Mark–Resight
Description:
ABSTRACT Wildlife managers often need to estimate population abundance to make well‐informed decisions.
However, obtaining such estimates can be difficult and costly, particularly for species with small populations, wide distributions, and spatial clustering of individuals.
For this reason, DNA surveys and capture–recapture modeling has become increasingly common where direct observation is consistently difficult or counts are small or variable.
We compared the precision, as indicated by the coefficient of variation (CV), and cost‐effectiveness of 2 methods to estimate abundance of desert bighorn sheep ( Ovis canadensis nelsoni ) populations: traditional ground‐based mark–resight and fecal DNA capture–recapture.
In the Marble Mountains in the Mojave Desert of southeastern California, USA, we conducted annual ground‐based mark–resight surveys and collected fecal samples at water sources concurrently during the dry seasons (Jun–Jul) of 2016 and 2017.
Fecal DNA samples were genotyped to identify unique individuals.
The Lincoln–Peterson bias‐corrected estimator and Huggins closed‐capture recapture models were used to estimate abundance for the ground‐based mark resight and fecal DNA capture–recapture, respectively.
We compared costs between the 2 methods for our study and used simulations to estimate costs for a variety of possible sampling scenarios for our study system based on field‐based estimates.
Population abundance estimates from fecal DNA capture–recapture achieved much greater precision (CV = 5–7%) than estimates derived from ground‐based mark–resight (CV = 21–56%).
Our simulations indicated that for a population of 100, 2 sampling occasions, and resight probability of 0.
20, the lowest CV obtained by mark–resight was approximately 12%.
We predict the cost of abundance estimates for this level of precision (CV = 12%) from fecal DNA capture–recapture would be 28% of the cost of ground‐based mark–resight (i.
e.
, a 72% cost reduction).
We conclude that fecal DNA capture–recapture is a highly cost‐effective alternative for estimating abundance of relatively small populations (≤300) of desert bighorn sheep.
More broadly, integrating simulated study designs with cost analyses provides a tool to identify the most effective method for estimating abundance over a wide variety of sampling scenarios.
© 2020 The Wildlife Society.

Related Results

Comparing fecal DNA capture‐recapture to mark‐resight for estimating abundance of mule deer on winter ranges
Comparing fecal DNA capture‐recapture to mark‐resight for estimating abundance of mule deer on winter ranges
AbstractMonitoring big game populations is necessary for making well‐informed management decisions. In the eastern Sierra Nevada in California, USA, mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus)...
Genome wide hypomethylation and youth-associated DNA gap reduction promoting DNA damage and senescence-associated pathogenesis
Genome wide hypomethylation and youth-associated DNA gap reduction promoting DNA damage and senescence-associated pathogenesis
Abstract Background: Age-associated epigenetic alteration is the underlying cause of DNA damage in aging cells. Two types of youth-associated DNA-protection epigenetic mark...
Camera traps and mark‐resight models: The value of ancillary data for evaluating assumptions
Camera traps and mark‐resight models: The value of ancillary data for evaluating assumptions
ABSTRACTUnbiased estimators of abundance and density are fundamental to the study of animal ecology and critical for making sound management decisions. Capture–recapture models are...
A spatial mark–resight model augmented with telemetry data
A spatial mark–resight model augmented with telemetry data
Abundance and population density are fundamental pieces of information for population ecology and species conservation, but they are difficult to estimate for rare and elusive spec...
Echinococcus granulosus in Environmental Samples: A Cross-Sectional Molecular Study
Echinococcus granulosus in Environmental Samples: A Cross-Sectional Molecular Study
Abstract Introduction Echinococcosis, caused by tapeworms of the Echinococcus genus, remains a significant zoonotic disease globally. The disease is particularly prevalent in areas...
Use of capture–recapture models with mark‐resight data to estimate abundance of Aleutian cackling geese
Use of capture–recapture models with mark‐resight data to estimate abundance of Aleutian cackling geese
ABSTRACTThe Aleutian cackling goose (Branta hutchinsii leucopareia) was listed as endangered in 1967, downgraded to threatened in 1990, and removed from protection under the endang...
Painful Defecation and Fecal Soiling in Children
Painful Defecation and Fecal Soiling in Children
Fecal soiling is a common complaint among school-age children. The fecal soiling is often accompanied by chronic constipation and so-called "idiopathic," "functional," or "psychoge...
P118 Fecal content from IBD patients disturbs epithelial functions in two model systems
P118 Fecal content from IBD patients disturbs epithelial functions in two model systems
Abstract Background Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) result from abnormal interactions between the immune system, epithelial ba...

Back to Top