4.6 Review

Removal modelling in ecology: A systematic review

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229965

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. EPSRC [EP/S020470/1]
  2. EPSRC [EP/S020470/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Removal models have been used for over 80 years to estimate unknown population sizes and more recently for management actions on non desirable species or translocation evaluation. Despite evolution, the data collection protocol remains similar, with individuals being captured and removed at each sampling occasion. This methodological review highlights developments in the analysis of removal data for ecologists looking to implement these approaches, showcasing the attractions and potential future role of this technique.
Removal models were proposed over 80 years ago as a tool to estimate unknown population size. More recently, they are used as an effective tool for management actions for the control of non desirable species, or for the evaluation of translocation management actions. Although the models have evolved over time, in essence, the protocol for data collection has remained similar: at each sampling occasion attempts are made to capture and remove individuals from the study area. Within this paper we review the literature of removal modelling and highlight the methodological developments for the analysis of removal data, in order to provide a unified resource for ecologists wishing to implement these approaches. Models for removal data have developed to better accommodate important features of the data and we discuss the shift in the required assumptions for the implementation of the models. The relative simplicity of this type of data and associated models mean that the method remains attractive and we discuss the potential future role of this technique.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available