Band reporting rates of waterfowl: does individual heterogeneity bias estimated survival rates?
Article first published online: 30 SEP 2013
© 2013 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Ecology and Evolution
Volume 3, Issue 12, pages 4215–4220, October 2013
How to Cite
Ecology and Evolution 2013; 3(12): 4215–4220
- Issue published online: 23 OCT 2013
- Article first published online: 30 SEP 2013
- Manuscript Accepted: 29 AUG 2013
- Manuscript Revised: 28 AUG 2013
- Manuscript Received: 27 AUG 2013
- Colorado State University
- The University of Minnesota
- Band recoveries;
- heterogeneous recovery rates;
- individual random effects;
- logit normal;
- ring recoveries;
- Seber model;
- waterfowl survival
In capture–recapture studies, the estimation accuracy of demographic parameters is essential to the efficacy of management of hunted animal populations. Dead recovery models based upon the reporting of rings or bands are often used for estimating survival of waterfowl and other harvested species. However, distance from the ringing site or condition of the bird may introduce substantial individual heterogeneity in the conditional band reporting rates (r), which could cause bias in estimated survival rates (S) or suggest nonexistent individual heterogeneity in S. To explore these hypotheses, we ran two sets of simulations (n = 1000) in MARK using Seber's dead recovery model, allowing time variation on both S and r. This included a series of heterogeneity models, allowing substantial variation on logit(r), and control models with no heterogeneity. We conducted simulations using two different values of S: S = 0.60, which would be typical of dabbling ducks such as mallards (Anas platyrhynchos), and S = 0.80, which would be more typical of sea ducks or geese. We chose a mean reporting rate on the logit scale of −1.9459 with SD = 1.5 for the heterogeneity models (producing a back-transformed mean of 0.196 with SD = 0.196, median = 0.125) and a constant reporting rate for the control models of 0.196. Within these sets of simulations, estimation models where σS = 0 and σS > 0 (σS is SD of individual survival rates on the logit scale) were incorporated to investigate whether real heterogeneity in r would induce apparent individual heterogeneity in S. Models where σS = 0 were selected approximately 91% of the time over models where σS > 0. Simulation results showed < 0.05% relative bias in estimating survival rates except for models estimating σS > 0 when true S = 0.8, where relative bias was a modest 0.5%. These results indicate that considerable variation in reporting rates does not cause major bias in estimated survival rates of waterfowl, further highlighting the robust nature of dead recovery models that are being used for the management of harvested species.