Are the numbers adding up? Exploiting discrepancies among complementary population models. Issue 2 (24th December 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Stenglein, Jennifer L.; Zhu, Jun; Clayton, Murray K.; Van Deelen, Timothy R.
• Is Part Of: Ecology and evolution. Volume 5:Issue 2(2015:Feb.)
• Page Start: 368
• Page End: 376
• Publication Date: 2014-12-24
• Subjects: Ecology -- Periodicals; Evolution -- Periodicals; 577.05
• DOI: 10.1002/ece3.1365
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2045-7758

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" id="ece31365-abs-0001"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>Large carnivores are difficult to monitor because they tend to be sparsely distributed, sensitive to human activity, and associated with complex life histories. Consequently, understanding population trend and viability requires conservationists to cope with uncertainty and bias in population data. Joint analysis of combined data sets using multiple models (i.e., integrated population model) can improve inference about mechanisms (e.g., habitat heterogeneity and food distribution) affecting population dynamics. However, unobserved or unobservable processes can also introduce bias and can be difficult to quantify. We developed a Bayesian hierarchical modeling approach for inference on an integrated population model that reconciles annual population counts with recruitment and survival data (i.e., demographic processes). Our modeling framework is flexible and enables a realistic form of population dynamics by fitting separate density‐dependent responses for each demographic process. Discrepancies estimated from shared parameters among different model components represent unobserved additions (i.e., recruitment or immigration) or removals (i.e., death or emigration) when annual population counts are reliable. In a case study of gray wolves in Wisconsin (1980–2011), concordant with policy changes, we estimated that a discrepancy of 0% (1980–1995), −2% (1996–2002), and 4% (2003–2011) in the annual mortality rate was needed to explain annual growth rate. Additional mortality in 2003–2011 may reflect density‐dependent mechanisms, changes in illegal killing with shifts in wolf management, and nonindependent censoring in survival data. Integrated population models provide insights into unobserved or unobservable processes by quantifying discrepancies among data sets. Our modeling approach is generalizable to many population analysis needs and allows for identifying dynamic differences due to external drivers, such as management or policy changes.</p> </abstract>