Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A review of designs for capture–mark–recapture studies in discrete time

  • EURING Proceedings
  • Published:
Journal of Ornithology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Design is the most influential element in the pathway to statistical inference. Designs for capture–mark–recapture (CMR) studies have become more diverse and complex during the past 50 years. I review the history of CMR designs developed for discrete time models with a focus on the assumptions of those designs, the parameters that can be estimated, the question that can be addressed, and the interrelationship among designs. CMR designs can be used to address questions in a variety of disciplines including population dynamics, evolutionary ecology, life-history, and community ecology. Methodological advances have also enabled investigators to consider designs that include nearly all common sources of CMR data simultaneously. CMR designs have been generalized to account for many assumptions; however, more emphasis needs to placed on use of auxiliary variables to increase precision and address model assumptions. CMR designs also need to be placed in the larger context of experimentation. Finally, development of more specific designs to fully utilize data resulting from emerging technologies is needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alisauskas RT, Lindberg MS (2002) Effects of neckbands on survival and fidelity of white-fronted and Canada geese captured as non-breeding adults. J Appl Stat 29:521–538

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson DR, Burnham KP, White GC, Otis DL (1983) Density estimation of small-mammal populations using a trapping web and distance sampling methods. Ecology 64:674–680

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson MG, Lindberg MS, Emery RB (2001) Probability of survival and breeding for juvenile female canvasbacks. J Wildl Manag 65:403–415

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson DR, Cooch EG, Gutierrez RJ, Krebs CJ, Lindberg MS, Pollock KH, Rubic CA, Shenk TM (2003) Rigorous science: suggestions on how to raise the bar. Wildl Soc Bull 31:296–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrup SC, McDonald TL, Manly BFJ (eds) (2005) Handbook of capture–recapture analysis. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnason AR (1972) Parameter estimation from mark-recapture experiments on two populations subject to migration and death. Res Popul Ecol 13:97–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnason AR (1973) The estimation of population size, migration rates, and survival in a stratified population. Res Popul Ecol 15:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey LL, Kendall WL, Church DR, Wilbur HM (2004) Estimating survival and breeding probabilities for pond-breeding amphibians using a modified robust design. Ecology 85:2456–2466

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey LL, Kendall WL, Church DR (2009) Exploring extensions to multi-state models with multiple unobservable states. In: Thomson DL, Cooch EG, Conroy MJ (eds) Modeling demographic processes in marked populations. Springer, New York, pp 693–709

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker RJ (1997) Joint modeling of live-recapture, tag-resight, and tag-recovery data. Biometrics 53:666–677

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker RJ, Kavalieris L (2001) Efficiency gain from auxiliary data requiring additional nuisance parameters. Biometrics 57:563–566

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barker RJ, White GC (2001) Joint analysis of live and dead encounters of marked animals. In: Field R, Warren RJ, Okarma H, Sievert PR (eds) Wildlife, land, and people: priorities for the 21st century. Proc Second Intl Wildl Manag Cong. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, pp 361–367

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker RJ, White GC, McDougal M (2005) Movement of paradise shelduck between molt sites: a joint multistate-dead recovery mark recapture model. J Wildl Manag 69:1194–1201

    Google Scholar 

  • Bart J, Robson DS (1982) Estimating survivorship when the subjects are visited periodically. Ecol 63:1078–1090

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellrose F (1945) Ratio of reported to unreported duck bands in Illinois. J Wildl Manag 9:254

    Google Scholar 

  • Besbeas P, Borysiewisc RS, Morgn BJT (2009) Completing the ecological jigsaw. In: Thomson DL, Cooch EG, Conroy MJ (eds) Modeling demographic processes in marked populations. Springer, New York, pp 513–540

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulanger J, Kendall KC, Stetz JB, Roon DA, Waits LP, Paetkau (2009) Multiple data sources improve DNA-based mark-recapture population estimates of grizzly bears. Ecol Appl 18:577–589

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownie C, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Robson DS (1985) Statistical inference from band recovery data—a handbook, 2nd edn. US Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication no. 156, Washington, DC, 305 p

  • Brownie C, Hines JE, Nichols JD, Pollock KH, Hestbeck JB (1993) Capture–recapture studies for multiple strata including non-Markovian transitions. Biometrics 49:1173–1187

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckland ST, Burnham KP, Augustin NH (1997) Model selection: an integral part of inference. Biom 53:603–618

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunck CM, Pollock KM (1993) Estimating survival of radio-tagged birds. In: Lebreton J-D, North PM (eds) Marked individual in the study of bird populations. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, pp 51–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP (1990) Survival analysis of recovery data from birds ringed as young: efficiency of analyses when number of rings are known. Ring 13:115–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP (1993) A theory for combined analysis of ring recovery and recapture data. In: Lebreton J-D, North PM (eds) Marked individuals in the study of bird population. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, pp 199–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR, White GC, Brownie C, Pollock KH (1987) Design and analysis methods for fish survival experiments based on release-recapture. Am Fish Soc Monogr 5:1–437

    Google Scholar 

  • Carothers AD (1979) Quantifying unequal catchability and its effect on survival estimates in an actual population. J Anim Ecol 48:863–869

    Google Scholar 

  • Chao A (1989) Estimating population size for sparse data in capture–recapture experiments. Biometrics 45:427–438

    Google Scholar 

  • Choquet RA, Reboult M, Pradel R, Gimenez O, Lebreton J-D (2004) M-SURGE: new software specifically designed for multistate capture–recapture models. Anim Biodivers Conserv 27:207–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilimburg AB, Lindberg MS, Tewksbury JJ, Heile SJ (2002) Effects of dispersal on survival probability of adult Yellow Warblers (Dendroica petechia). Auk 119:778–789

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran WG (1983) Planning and analysis of observational studies. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Conn PB, Cooch EG (2009) Multistate capture–recapture analysis under imperfect state observation: an application to disease modeling. J Appl Ecol 46:486–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Conn PB, Kendall WL, Samuel MD (2004) A general model for the analysis of mark-resight, mark-recapture, and band-recovery data under tag loss. Biometrics 60:900–909

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Conroy MR, Williams BK (1981) Sensitivity of band-reporting rate estimates to violation of assumptions. J Wildl Manag 45:789–792

    Google Scholar 

  • Conroy MJ, Hines JE, Williams BK (1989) Procedures for the analysis of band-recovery data and user instructions for program MULT. US Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication no. 175

  • Cook TD, Campbell DT (1979) Quasi-experimentation: design and analysis issues for field settings. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Cormack RM (1964) Estimates of survival from the sighting of marked animals. Biometrika 51:429–438

    Google Scholar 

  • Devineau O, Choquet R, Lebreton J-D (2006) Planning capture–recapture studies: straightforward precision, bias, and power calculations. Wildl Soc Bull 34:1028–1035

    Google Scholar 

  • Efford MG, Warburton B, Coleman MC, Barker RJ (2005) A field test of two methods for density estimation. Wildl Soc Bull 33:731–738

    Google Scholar 

  • Efford MG, Borchers DL, Byrom AE (2009) Density estimation by spatially explicit capture–recapture: likelihood-based methods. In: Thomson DL, Cooch EG, Conroy MJ (eds) Modeling demographic processes in marked populations. Springer, New York, pp 255–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher RA (1960) The design of experiments, 7th edn. Oliver and Boyd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujiwara M, Caswell H (2002) Estimating population projection matrices from multi-stage mark-recapture data. Ecology 83:3257–3265

    Google Scholar 

  • Garton EO, Wisdom MJ, Leban FA, Johnson BK (2001) Experimental design for radiotelemetry studies. In: Millspaugh JJ, Marzluff JM (eds) Design and analysis of wildlife radiotelemetry studies. Aca Press, San Diego, pp 329–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Heisey DM, Shaffer TL, White GC (2007) The ABC’s of nest survival: theory and application from a biostatistical perspective. Stud Avi Bio 34:13–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Hestbeck JB (1995) Bias in transition-specific survival and movement probabilities estimated using capture–recapture data. J Appl Stat 22:737–750

    Google Scholar 

  • Hestbeck JB, Nichols JD, Malecki RA (1991) Estimates of movement and site fidelity using mark–resight data of wintering Canada geese. Ecol 72:523–533

    Google Scholar 

  • Hines JE, Kendall WL, Nichols JD (2003) On the use of robust design with transient capture–recapture models. Auk 120:1151–1158

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurlbert SH (1984) Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol Monogr 54:187–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang WD, Chao A (1995) Quantifying the effects of unequal catchability on Jolly-Seber estimators via sample coverage. Biometrics 51:128–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Joe M, Pollock KH (2002) Separation of survival and movement rates in multi-state tag-return can capture–recapture models. J Appl Stat 29:373–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson DH (1979) Estimating nest success: the Mayfield method and an alternative. Auk 96:651–661

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson DH (2008) In defense of indices: the case of bird surveys. J Wildl Manag 72:857–868

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolly GM (1965) Explicit estimates from capture–recapture data with both death and immigration stochastic model. Biometrika 52:225–247

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL (1999) Robustness of closed capture–recapture methods to violation of the closure assumption. Ecology 80:2517–2525

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL (2004) Coping with unobservable and mis-classified states in capture–recapture studies. Anim Biodivers Conserv 27:97–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL (2009) One size does not fit all: adapting mark-recapture and occupancy models for state uncertainty. In: Thomson DL, Cooch EG, Conroy MJ (eds) Modeling demographic processes in marked populations. Springer, New York, pp 765–780

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, Bjorkland R (2001) Using open robust design models to estimate temporary emigration from capture–recapture data. Biometrics 57:1113–1122

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, Nichols JD (1995) On the use of secondary capture–recapture samples to estimate temporary emigration and breeding proportions. J Appl Stat 22:751–762

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, Pollock KH (1992) The Robust design in capture–recapture studies: a review and evaluation by Monte Carlo simulation. In: McCullough, Barrett RD (eds) Wildlife 2001: populations. Elsevier, London, pp 31–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, White GC (2009) A cautionary note on substituting spatial subunits for repeated temporal sampling in studies of site occupancy. J Appl Ecol 46:1182–1188

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, Pollock KH, Brownie C (1995) A likelihood-based approach to capture–recapture estimation of demographic parameters under the robust design. Biometrics 51:293–308

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, Nichols JD, Hines JE (1997) Estimating temporary emigration and breeding proportions using capture–recapture data with Pollock’s Robust Design. Ecology 78:563–578

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, Hines JE, Nichols JD (2003) Adjusting multi-state capture–recapture models for mis-classification bias: manatee breeding proportions. Ecology 84:1058–1066

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, Langtimm CA, Beck CA, Runge MC (2004) Mark-recapture analysis for estimating manatee reproductive rates. Mar Mamm Sci 20:424–437

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, Conn PB, Hines JE (2006) Combining multi-state capture–recapture data with tag recoveries to estimate demographic parameters. Ecology 87:169–177

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kendall WL, Converse SJ, Doherty PF Jr, Naughton MB, Anders A, Hines JE, Flint E (2009) Sampling design considerations for demographic studies: a case of colonial seabirds. Ecol Appl 19:55–68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klett AT, Duebbert HF, Faanes CA, Higgins KF (1986) Techniques for study nest success of ducks in upland habitats in the prairie pothole region. US Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication no. 158

  • Lebreton J-D, Pradel R (2002) Multistate recapture models: modelling incomplete individual histories. J Appl Stat 29:353–369

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebreton J-D, Burnham KP, Clobert J, Anderson DR (1992) Modeling survival and testing biological hypotheses using marked animals: case studies and recent advances. Ecol Monogr 62:67–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebreton J-D, Almeras T, Pradel R (1999) Competing events, mixtures of information and multistratum recapture models. Bird Study Suppl 46:39–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln FC (1930) Calculating waterfowl abundance on the basis of banding returns. US Department of Agriculture Circular No. 118:1–4

  • Lindberg MS, Rexstad EA (2002) Capture–recapture sampling designs. In: El-Shaarawi AH, Piegorsch WW (eds) Encyclopedia of environmetrics, 1st edn. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Chichester, pp 251–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg MS, Walker J (2007) Satellite telemetry in avian research: sample size considerations. J Wildl Manag 71:1002–1009

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg MS, Kendall WL, Hines JE, Anderson MG (2001) Combining band recovery data and Pollock’s robust design to model temporary and permanent emigration. Biometrics 57:273–281

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lukacs PM, Burnham KP (2005) A review of capture–recapture methods applicable to DNA-based noninvasive sampling. Mol Ecol 14:3909–3919

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lukacs PM, Burnham KP, Dreher BP, Scribner KY, Winterstein SR (2009) Extending the robust design for DNA-based capture–recapture data incorporating genotyping error and laboratory data. In: Thomson DL, Cooch EG, Conroy MJ (eds) Modeling demographic processes in marked populations. Springer, New York, pp 711–726

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Royle JA (2005) Designing efficient occupancy studies: general advice and tips on allocation of survey effort. J Appl Ecol 42:1105–1114

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Lachman GB, Droege S, Royle JA, Langtimm CA (2002) Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecol 83:2248–2255

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Knutson MG, Franklin AD (2003) Estimating site occupancy, colonization and local extinction when a species is detected imperfectly. Ecology 84:2200–2207

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Bailey LL, Nichols JD (2004) Investigating species co-occurrence patterns when species are detected imperfectly. J Anim Ecol 73:546–555

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Royle JA, Pollock KH, Hines JE, Bailey LL (2005) Occupancy estimation and modeling: inferring patterns and dynamics of species occurrence. Elsevier, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Seamans ME, Gutiérrez RJ (2009) Modeling species occurrence dynamics with multiple states and imperfect detection. Ecology 90:823–835

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Manly BFJ (1992) The design and analysis of research studies. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield H (1961) Nesting success calculated from exposure. Wilson Bull. 73:255–261

    Google Scholar 

  • McClintock BT, White GC (2009) A less field-intensive robust design for estimating demographic parameters with mark-resight data. Ecology 90:313–320

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McClintock BT, White GC, Burnham KP, Pryde MA (2009) A generalized mixed effects model of abundance for mark-resight data when sampling is without replacement. In: Thomson DL, Cooch EG, Conroy MJ (eds) Modeling demographic processes in marked populations. Springer, New York, pp 271–290

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey KS, Pearson D (2001) Population estimation with sparse data: the role of estimators versus indices revisited. Can J Zool 79:1754–1765

    Google Scholar 

  • McPherson RJ, Arnold TW, Armstrong LM, Schwarz CJ (2003) Estimating the nest-success rate and the number of nests initiated by radiomarked mallards. J Wildl Manag 67:843–851

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison ML, Block WM, Strickland MD, Kendall WL (2001) Wildlife study design. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray DL, Fuller MR (2000) A critical review of the effects of marking on the biology of vertebrates. In: Boitani L, Fuller T (eds) Research techniques in animal ecology: controversies and consequences. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 15–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD (1991) Responses of North American duck populations to harvest. In: Perrins CM, Lebreton J-D, Hirons GJM (eds) Bird population studies: relevance to conversation and management. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 498–525

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD (1996) Sources of variation in migratory movements of animal populations: statistical inference and a selective review of empirical results for birds. In: Rhodes OE Jr, Chesser RK, Smith MH (eds) Population dynamics in ecological space and time. University Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 147–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Coffman CJ (1999) Demographic parameter estimation for experimental landscape studies of small mammal populations. In: Barrett GW, Peles JD (eds) Landscape ecology of small mammals. Springer, New York, pp 287–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Kendall WL (1995) The use of multistate capture–recapture models to address questions of evolutionary ecology. J Appl Stat 22:835–846

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Boulinier T, Hines JE, Pollock KH, Sauer JR (1998) Estimating rates of local species extinction, colonization, and turnover in animal communities. Ecol Appl 8:1213–1225

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Kendall WL, Hines JE, Spendelow JA (2004) Estimation of sex-specific survival from capture–recapture data when sex is not always known. Ecology 85:3192–3201

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Hines JE, MacKenzie DI, Seamens ME, Gutiérrez (2007) Occupancy estimation with multiple states and state uncertainty. Ecology 88:1395–1400

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Thomas L, Conn PB (2009) Inferences about landbird abundance from count data: recent advances and future direction. In: Thomson DL, Cooch EG, Conroy MJ (eds) Modeling demographic processes in marked populations. Springer, New York., pp 201–235

    Google Scholar 

  • Otis DL, White GC (1999) Autocorrelation of location estimates in the analysis of radiotracking data. J Wildl Manag 63:1039–1044

    Google Scholar 

  • Otis DL, Burnham KP, White GC, Anderson DR (1978) Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal populations. Wildl. Monogr. 62:1–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Platt JR (1964) Strong inference. Sci 146:347–353

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH (1982) A capture–recapture design robust to unequal probability of capture. J Wildl Manag 46:757–760

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH (2002) The use of auxiliary variables in capture–recapture modeling: an overview. J Appl Stat 29:85–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH, Winterstein SR, Conroy MJ (1989a) Estimation and analysis of survival distributions for radio-tagged animals. Biometrics 45:99–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH, Winterstein SR, Bunck CM, Curtis PD (1989b) Survival analysis in telemetry studies: the staggered entry design. J Wildl Manag 53:7–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH, Nichols JD, Brownie C, Hines JE (1990) Statistical inference for capture–recapture experiments. Wildl Monogr 107:1–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell LA, Conroy MJ, Hines JE, Nichols JD, Krementz DG (2000) Simultaneous use of mark-recapture and radio telemetry to estimate survival, movement, and capture rates. J Wildl Manag 64:302–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradel R (1993) Flexibility in survival analysis from recapture data: handling trap-dependence. In: Lebreton J-D, North PM (eds) Marked individuals in the study of bird population. Birkhaüser, Basel, pp 29–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradel R (2005) Multievent: an extension of multistate capture–recapture models to uncertain states. Biometrics 61:442–447

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pradel R, Hine JE, Lebreton J-D, Nichols JD (1997) Capture–recapture survival models taking account of transients. Biometrics 53:60–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Raveling DG (1966) Factors affecting age ratios of samples of Canada geese caught with cannon-nets. J Wildl Manag 30:682–691

    Google Scholar 

  • Robson DS, Reiger HA (1964) Sample size in Petersen mark-recapture experiments. Trans Am Fish Soc 93:215–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Romesburg HC (1981) Wildlife science: gaining reliable knowledge. J Wildl Manag 45:293–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum PR (1995) Observational studies. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotella JJ (2007) Modeling nest-survival data: recent improvements and future directions. Stud Avi Bio 34:145–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotella JJ, Taper ML, Hansen AJ (2000) Correcting nesting success estimates for possible observer effects: maximum likelihood estimates of daily survival rates with reduced bias. Auk 117:92–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotella JJ, Taper ML, Stephens SE, Lindberg MS (2007) Extending methods for modeling heterogeneity in nest-survival data using generalized mixed models. Stud Avi Bio 34:34–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Royle JA, Garrettson PR (2005) The effects of reward band value on the mid-continent mallard band reporting rate. J Wildl Manag 69:800–804

    Google Scholar 

  • Royle JA, Link WA (2005) A general class of multinomial mixture models for anuran calling survey data. Ecology 86:2505–2512

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudnick JA, Katzner TE, Bragin EA, Rhodes OE Jr, DeWoody JA (2005) Using naturally shed feathers for individual identification, genetic parentage analyses, and population monitoring in a an endangered Eastern Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliaca) population from Kazakhstan. Mol Ecol 14:2959–2967

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scheaffer RL, Mendenhall W III, Ott RL (1996) Elementary survey sampling, 5th edn. Duxbury Press, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  • Schofield MR, Barker RJ (2009) A further step towards the mother-of-all-models: flexibility and functionality in the modeling of capture–recapture data. In: Thomson DL, Cooch EG, Conroy MJ (eds) Modeling demographic processes in marked populations. Springer, New York, pp 677–689

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz CJ (2009) Migration and movement–The next step. In: Thomson DL, Cooch EG, Conroy MJ (eds) Modeling demographic processes in marked populations. Springer, New York, pp 323–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz CJ, Stobo WT (1997) Estimating temporary migration using the robust design. Biometrics 53:253–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz CJ, Schweigert J, Arnason AN (1993) Using tag-recovery data to estimate migration rates. Biometrics 49:177–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Seber GAF (1965) A note on the multiple recapture census. Biometrika 52:249–259

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Seber GAF (1970) Estimating age-specific survival and reporting rates for adult birds from band returns. Biometrika 57:313–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Seber GAF (1971) Estimating age-specific survival rates for birds from bird-band returns when the reporting rate is constant. Biometrika 58:491–497

    Google Scholar 

  • Seber GAF (1982) The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters, 2nd edn. Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith DR, Anderson DR (1987) Effects of lengthy ringing periods on estimators of annual survival. Acta Ornithologica 23:69–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanley TR (2000) Modeling and estimation of stage-specific daily survival probabilities of nests. Ecology 81:2048–2053

    Google Scholar 

  • Szymczak MR, Rexstad EA (1991) Harvest distribution and survival of a gadwall population. J Wildl Manag 55:592–600

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavecchia G, Pradel R, Lebreton J-D, Johnson AR, Mondain-Monval J-Y (2001) The effect of lead exposure on survival of adult mallards in the Camarue, southern France. J Appl Ecol 38:1197–1207

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Webster MS, Marra PP, Haig SM, Bensch S, Holmes RT (2002) Links between worlds: unraveling migratory connectivity. Trends Ecol Evol 17:76–83

    Google Scholar 

  • White GC (2002) Discussant: the use of auxiliary variables in capture–recapture modeling: an overview. J Appl Stat 29:103–106

    Google Scholar 

  • White GC, Burnham KP (1999) Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study Suppl 46:120–138

    Google Scholar 

  • White GC, Garrott RA (1990) Analysis of wildlife radio-tracking data. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • White GC, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Otis DL (1982) Capture–recapture and removal methods for sampling closed populations. Los Alamos Nat Lab Report LA-8787-NERP, Los Alamos

  • Williams BK, Nichols JD, Conroy MJ (2002) Analysis and management of animal populations. Acad Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoccoz NG, Nichols JD, Boulinier T (2001) Monitoring of biological diversity in space and time. Trends Ecol Evol 16:446–453

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the EURING scientific committee for the opportunity to develop this manuscript. P. Doherty, W. Kendall, W. Link, M. Schaub, and an anonymous reviewer provided helpful comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology and Wildlife, Institute of Arctic Biology, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, 99775, USA

    Mark S. Lindberg

Authors
  1. Mark S. Lindberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark S. Lindberg.

Additional information

Communicated by M. Schaub.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lindberg, M.S. A review of designs for capture–mark–recapture studies in discrete time. J Ornithol 152 (Suppl 2), 355–370 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-010-0533-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-010-0533-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation