Reply to Efford on ‘Integrating resource selection information with spatial capture-recapture’

Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Richard B Chandler; Angela K Fuller; Catherine C Sun
By: , and 

Links

Abstract

1. We proposed (Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2013, 4) a model for combining telemetry data with spatial capture–recapture (SCR) data that was vigorously criticized by Efford (Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2014, 000, 000). Efford's main claim was that our encounter probability model was incorrect, and therefore our R code and simulation results were wrong.

2. In fact, our encounter probability model is correct under the Poisson point process model that we used as a basis for our integrated model. On the other hand, the basis for Efford's claims clearly rest on the assumption of an alternative model which, while possibly useful, is distinct from that analysed in Royle et al. (Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2013, 4).

3. A key point of Royle et al. (Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2013, 4) was that active resource selection induces heterogeneity in encounter probability which, if unaccounted for, should bias estimates of population size or density. The models of Royle et al. (Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2013, 4) and Efford (Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 2014, 000, 000) merely amount to alternative models of resource selection, and hence varying amounts of heterogeneity in encounter probability.

Additional publication details

Publication type Article
Publication Subtype Journal Article
Title Reply to Efford on ‘Integrating resource selection information with spatial capture-recapture’
Series title Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Volume 5
Issue 7
Year Published 2014
Language English
Publisher British Ecological Society
Publisher location Hoboken, NJ
Contributing office(s) Patuxent Wildlife Research Center
Description 3 p.
First page 603
Last page 605
Online Only (Y/N) N
Additional Online Files (Y/N) N