Geology topics

Richard Bischof

Publications and source records attributed to Richard Bischof.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2022

Comparison of methods for estimating density and population trends for low-density Asian bears

Populations of bears in Asia are vulnerable to extinction and effective monitoring is critical to measure and direct conservation efforts. Population abundance (local density) or growth (λ ) are the most sensitive metrics to change. We discuss the value in implementing spatially explicit capture-recapture (SCR), the current gold standard for density estimation, and open population SCR (OPSCR) to monitor changes in density over time. We provide guidance for designing studies to provide estimates with sufficient power to detect changes. Because of the wide availability of camera traps and interest in their use, we consider six density estimation methods and their extensions developed for use with camera traps, with specific consideration of assumptions and applications for monitoring Asian bears. We conducted a power analysis to calculate the precision in estimates needed to detect changes in populations with reference to IUCN Red List criteria. We performed a systematic review of empirical studies implementing camera trap abundance estimation methods and considered sample sizes, effort, and model assumptions required to achieve adequate precision for population monitoring. We found SCR and OPSCR, reliant on “marked” individuals, are currently the only methods with enough power to reliably detect even moderate to major (20–80%) declines. Camera trap methods with unmarked individuals rarely achieved precision sufficient to detect even large declines (80–90%), although with some exceptions (e.g., situations with moderate population densities, large number of sampling sites, or inclusion of ancillary local telemetry data. We describe additional estimation options including line transects, direct observations, monitoring age-specific survival and reproductive rates, and hybrid/integrated methodologies that may have potential to work for some Asian bear populations. We conclude monitoring changes in abundance or density is possible for most Asian bear populations but will require collaboration among researchers over broad spatial extents and extensive financial investment to overcome biological and logistical constraints. We strongly encourage practitioners to consider study design and sampling effort required to meet objectives by conducting simulations, power analyses, and assumption checks prior to implementing monitoring efforts, and reporting standardized dispersion measures such as coefficients of variation to allow for assessment of precision. Our guidance is relevant to other low-density and wide-ranging species.

Global Ecology and Conservation↗

USGS2020

Estimating and forecasting spatial population dynamics of apex predators using transnational genetic monitoring

The ongoing recovery of terrestrial large carnivores in North America and Europe is accompanied by intense controversy. On the one hand, reestablishment of large carnivores entails a recovery of their most important ecological role, predation. On the other hand, societies are struggling to relearn how to live with apex predators that kill livestock, compete for game species, and occasionally injure or kill people. Those responsible for managing these species and mitigating conflict often lack fundamental information due to a long-standing challenge in ecology: How do we draw robust population-level inferences for elusive animals spread over immense areas? Here we showcase the application of an effective tool for spatially explicit tracking and forecasting of wildlife population dynamics at scales that are relevant to management and conservation. We analyzed the world’s largest dataset on carnivores comprising more than 35,000 noninvasively obtained DNA samples from over 6,000 individual brown bears ( Ursus arctos ), gray wolves ( Canis lupus ), and wolverines ( Gulo gulo ). Our analyses took into account that not all individuals are detected and, even if detected, their fates are not always known. We show unequivocal quantitative evidence of large carnivore recovery in northern Europe, juxtaposed with the finding that humans are the single-most important factor driving the dynamics of these apex predators. We present maps and forecasts of the spatiotemporal dynamics of large carnivore populations, transcending national boundaries and management regimes.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of↗

USGS2020

Consequences of ignoring group association in spatial capture-recapture analysis

Many models in population ecology, including spatial capture–recapture (SCR) models, assume that individuals are distributed and detected independently of one another. In reality, this is rarely the case – both antagonistic and gregarious relationships lead to non-independent spatial configurations, with territorial exclusion at one end of the spectrum and group-living at the other. Previous simulation studies suggest that grouping has limited impact on the outcome of SCR analyses. However, group associations entail not only spatial clustering of activity centers but also coordinated space use by group members, potentially impacting both ecological and observation processes underlying SCR analysis. We simulated SCR scenarios with different strengths of aggregation (clustering of individuals into groups with shared activity centers) and cohesion (synchronization of detection patterns of members of a group). We then fit SCR models to the simulated data sets and evaluated the effect of aggregation and cohesion on parameter estimates. Low to moderate aggregation and cohesion did not impact the bias and precision of estimates of density and the scale parameter of the detection function. However, non-independence between individuals led to high levels of overdispersion. Overdispersion strongly decreased the coverage of confidence intervals around parameter estimates, thereby increasing the probability of erroneous predictions. Our results indicate that SCR models are robust to moderate levels of aggregation and cohesion. Nonetheless, spatial dependence between individuals can lead to false inference. We recommend that practitioners 1) test for the presence of overdispersion in SCR data caused by aggregation and cohesion, and, if necessary, 2) correct their variance estimates using the overdispersion factor ĉ . Approaches for doing both are described in this paper. We also urge the development of SCR models that incorporate spatial associations between individuals not only to account for overdispersion but also to obtain quantitative information about social aspects of study populations.

Wildlife Biology↗

USGS2018

Using partial aggregation in spatial capture recapture

Spatial capture–recapture (SCR) models are commonly used for analysing data collected using noninvasive genetic sampling (NGS). Opportunistic NGS often leads to detections that do not occur at discrete detector locations. Therefore, spatial aggregation of individual detections into fixed detectors (e.g., centre of grid cells) is an option to increase computing speed of SCR analyses. However, it may reduce precision and accuracy of parameter estimations. Using simulations, we explored the impact that spatial aggregation of detections has on a trade‐off between computing time and parameter precision and bias, under a range of biological conditions. We used three different observation models: the commonly used Poisson and Bernoulli models, as well as a novel way to partially aggregate detections (Partially Aggregated Binary model [PAB]) to reduce the loss of information after aggregating binary detections. The PAB model divides detectors into K subdetectors and models the frequency of subdetectors with more than one detection as a binomial response with a sample size of K. Finally, we demonstrate the consequences of aggregation and the use of the PAB model using NGS data from the monitoring of wolverine ( Gulo gulo ) in Norway. Spatial aggregation of detections, while reducing computation time, does indeed incur costs in terms of reduced precision and accuracy, especially for the parameters of the detection function. SCR models estimated abundance with a low bias (<10%) even at high degree of aggregation, but only for the Poisson and PAB models. Overall, the cost of aggregation is mitigated when using the Poisson and PAB models. At the same level of aggregation, the PAB observation model out‐performs the Bernoulli model in terms of accuracy of estimates, while offering the benefits of a binary observation model (less assumptions about the underlying ecological process) over the count‐based model. We recommend that detector spacing after aggregation does not exceed 1.5 times the scale‐parameter of the detection function in order to limit bias. We recommend the use of the PAB observation model when performing spatial aggregation of binary data as it can mitigate the cost of aggregation, compared to the Bernoulli model.

Methods in Ecology and Evolution↗