4.7 Article

Absent or undetected? Effects of non-detection of species occurrence on wildlife-habitat models

期刊

BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION
卷 116, 期 2, 页码 195-203

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00190-3

关键词

detection probability; habitat-based model; logistic regression model; misclassification; parameter estimation; patch occupancy model; presence-absence; release-recapture

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Presence-absence data are used widely in analysis of wildlife-habitat relationships. Failure to detect a species' presence in an occupied habitat patch is a common sampling problem when the population size is small, individuals are difficult to sample, or sampling effort is limited. In this paper, the influence of non-detection of occurrence on parameter estimates of logistic regression models of wildlife-habitat relationships was assessed using analytical analysis and simulations. Two patterns of non-detection were investigated: (1) a random distribution of non-detection among occupied patches; and (2) a non-random distribution of non-detection in which the probability of detecting a species in, an occupied patch covaried with measurable habitat variables. Our results showed that logistic regression models of wildlife-habitat relationships were sensitive to even low levels of non-detection in occupancy data. Both analytic and simulation studies show that non-detection yields bias in parameter estimation of logistic regression models. More importantly, the direction of bias was affected by the underlying pattern of non-detection and whether the habitat variable was positively or negatively related to occupancy. For a positive habitat coefficient, a random distribution of non-detection yielded negative bias in estimation, whereas linkage of the probability of non-detection to habitat covariates produced positive bias. For a negative habitat coefficient, the pattern was reversed, with a random distribution of non-detection leading to positive bias in estimation. A release-recapture livetrapping study of small mammals in central Indiana, USA, was used to illustrate the magnitude of non-detection in a typical field sampling protocol with varying levels of sampling intensity. Estimates of non-detection error ranged from 0 to 23% for seven species after 5 days of sampling. We suggest that for many sampling situations, relationships between probability of detection and habitat covariates need to be established to correctly interpret results of wildlife-habitat models. (C) 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据