Translator Disclaimer
1 November 2000 AN EMPIRICAL TEST OF USING COUNTS OF INDIVIDUALS CAPTURED AS INDICES OF POPULATION SIZE
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Simple counts of individuals are commonly used in studies of mammalian populations. However, such counts are known to routinely underestimate population size. When used, counts are assumed to be proportional to population size. We tested the validity of that assumption by analyzing capture–recapture data on 5 species of rodents trapped at a single site during monthly sessions from 1973 through 1993. For each 3-day trapping session, we estimated numbers of animals of each species residing on our trapping grid with selected-model and interpolated-jackknife estimators from the program CAPTURE, the modified Lincoln–Petersen estimator, and the Jolly–Seber estimator. We tested for proportionality by fitting a regression line, constrained to pass through the origin, of estimated population size to each of 3 “counts”: numbers of individuals, numbers of captures, and minimum number known alive (MNKA). We then tested validity of these equations by predicting estimated population size from counts from 1994 through 1998. In general, counts were proportional to estimated numbers within a species, so counts were indices of density and yielded similar patterns of population fluctuations. However, regression coefficients, which reflected probabilities of capture, varied among species. Consequently, counts were not appropriate for interspecific comparisons of abundance, even when trapping protocols were invariant. Probabilities of capture also are likely to vary among sites, trapping protocols, and perhaps by seasons, so conditions for counts as valid indices of population size are restrictive.

Norman A. Slade and Susan M. Blair "AN EMPIRICAL TEST OF USING COUNTS OF INDIVIDUALS CAPTURED AS INDICES OF POPULATION SIZE," Journal of Mammalogy 81(4), 1035-1045, (1 November 2000). https://doi.org/10.1644/1545-1542(2000)081<1035:AETOUC>2.0.CO;2
Received: 10 May 1999; Accepted: 20 March 2000; Published: 1 November 2000
JOURNAL ARTICLE
11 PAGES

This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.
+ SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top