A comparison of cost and quality of three methods for estimating density for wild pig (Sus scrofa)
Autor: | David A. Keiter, Antoinette J. Piaggio, Chris Slootmaker, Kim M. Pepin, Amy J. Davis, Elizabeth M. Kierepka, James C. Beasley |
---|---|
Rok vydání: | 2019 |
Předmět: |
0106 biological sciences
Population dynamics Cost effectiveness media_common.quotation_subject South Carolina Sus scrofa Wildlife Decision tree Ecological Parameter Monitoring Video Recording lcsh:Medicine Animals Wild Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction 010603 evolutionary biology 01 natural sciences Article Feces Population estimation Statistics Animals Wildlife management Quality (business) lcsh:Science media_common Population Density Multidisciplinary lcsh:R Biological techniques Sampling (statistics) DNA Trap (plumbing) 010601 ecology Environmental science lcsh:Q Introduced Species Genetic techniques |
Zdroj: | Scientific Reports Scientific Reports, Vol 10, Iss 1, Pp 1-14 (2020) |
ISSN: | 2045-2322 |
Popis: | A critical element in effective wildlife management is monitoring the status of wildlife populations; however, resources to monitor wildlife populations are typically limited. We compared cost effectiveness of three common population estimation methods (i.e. non-invasive DNA sampling, camera sampling, and sampling from trapping) by applying them to wild pigs (Sus scrofa) across three habitats in South Carolina, U.S.A where they are invasive. We used mark-recapture analyses for fecal DNA sampling data, spatially-explicit capture-recapture analyses for camera sampling data, and a removal analysis for removal sampling from trap data. Density estimates were similar across methods. Camera sampling was the least expensive, but had large variances. Fecal DNA sampling was the most expensive, although this technique generally performed well. We examined how reductions in effort by method related to increases in relative bias or imprecision. For removal sampling, the largest cost savings while maintaining unbiased density estimates was from reducing the number of traps. For fecal DNA sampling, a reduction in effort only minimally reduced costs due to the need for increased lab replicates while maintaining high quality estimates. For camera sampling, effort could only be marginally reduced before inducing bias. We provide a decision tree for researchers to help make monitoring decisions. |
Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
Externí odkaz: |