↓ Skip to main content

Trap Configuration and Spacing Influences Parameter Estimates in Spatial Capture-Recapture Models

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
150 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
326 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Trap Configuration and Spacing Influences Parameter Estimates in Spatial Capture-Recapture Models
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0088025
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine C. Sun, Angela K. Fuller, J. Andrew Royle

Abstract

An increasing number of studies employ spatial capture-recapture models to estimate population size, but there has been limited research on how different spatial sampling designs and trap configurations influence parameter estimators. Spatial capture-recapture models provide an advantage over non-spatial models by explicitly accounting for heterogeneous detection probabilities among individuals that arise due to the spatial organization of individuals relative to sampling devices. We simulated black bear (Ursus americanus) populations and spatial capture-recapture data to evaluate the influence of trap configuration and trap spacing on estimates of population size and a spatial scale parameter, sigma, that relates to home range size. We varied detection probability and home range size, and considered three trap configurations common to large-mammal mark-recapture studies: regular spacing, clustered, and a temporal sequence of different cluster configurations (i.e., trap relocation). We explored trap spacing and number of traps per cluster by varying the number of traps. The clustered arrangement performed well when detection rates were low, and provides for easier field implementation than the sequential trap arrangement. However, performance differences between trap configurations diminished as home range size increased. Our simulations suggest it is important to consider trap spacing relative to home range sizes, with traps ideally spaced no more than twice the spatial scale parameter. While spatial capture-recapture models can accommodate different sampling designs and still estimate parameters with accuracy and precision, our simulations demonstrate that aspects of sampling design, namely trap configuration and spacing, must consider study area size, ranges of individual movement, and home range sizes in the study population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 326 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
Australia 2 <1%
India 2 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 312 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 74 23%
Student > Master 71 22%
Researcher 65 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 7%
Student > Bachelor 21 6%
Other 48 15%
Unknown 25 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 177 54%
Environmental Science 82 25%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 2%
Mathematics 5 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 <1%
Other 13 4%
Unknown 40 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2014.
All research outputs
#15,866,607
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#138,034
of 202,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,446
of 310,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,638
of 5,651 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,026 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,790 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,651 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.