Rank and Redundancy of Multistate Mark-Recapture Models for Seabird Populations with Unobservable States

  • Christine M. Hunter
  • Hal Caswell
Part of the Environmental and Ecological Statistics book series (ENES, volume 3)


Unobservable stages are common in many life cycles. Estimates of the vital rates, such as survival and breeding probabilities, of these stages are essential for demographic analysis but difficult to obtain. Explicit modeling of these states in multi-state mark-recapture methods can provide such estimates. However, models can be rank-deficient, meaning that not all parameters can be estimated. Determining whether a model is full rank is essential for interpretation of model selection and estimation results. Full rank models can be obtained by imposing biologically reasonable constraints on parameters. Developing such models requires an efficient way to assess model rank and determine which parameters, if any, are redundant. We introduce the use of automatic differentiation (AD) for this purpose. It generates the Jacobian matrix of the likelihood function in a way that is numerically stable, can accommodate large complicated models, and produces rank estimates accurate to machine precision. It reveals whether a model is full rank or rank-deficient (either intrinsically or for a particular data set), how many parameters or parameter combinations can be estimated, and which parameters are confounded. We use the method to explore three examples relevant to seabirds: a model with multiple breeding sites, a model distinguishing successful and failed breeders, and a model for pre-breeder survival and recruitment. We find a surprisingly large number of time-invariant and time-varying models to be of full rank, thus allowing estimation of all parameters, despite the unobservable states. We present a biological example for the Wandering Albatross (Diomedea exulans). Reliable assessment of model rank for multi-state mark-recapture models with unobservable stages will make it possible to use these methods in demographic applications.


Full Rank Capture Probability Model Rank Constraint Model Automatic Differentiation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bailey LL, Kendall WL, Church DR, Wilbur HM (2004) Estimating survival and breeding probability for pond-breeding amphibians: a modified robust design. Ecology 85:2456–2466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brownie C, Hines JE, Nichols JD, Pollock K, Hestbeck JB (1993) Capture–recapture studies for multiple strata including non-Markovian transitions. Biometrics 49:1173–1187CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Cam E, Hines JE, Monnat J-Y, Nichols JD, Danchin E (1998) Are adult nonbreeders prudent parents? The kittiwake model. Ecology 79:2917–2930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Caswell H (2001) Matrix population models. Second edition. Sinauer, Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  5. Caswell H, Fujiwara M (2004) Beyond survival estimation: mark-recapture, matrix population models, and population dynamics. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 27:471–488Google Scholar
  6. Catchpole EA, Morgan BJT (1997) Detecting parameter redundancy. Biometrika 84:187–196CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Catchpole EA, Morgan BJT (2001) Deficiency of parameter-redundant models. Biometrika 88:593–598CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Catchpole EA, Freeman SN, Morgan BJT (1996) Steps to parameter redundancy in age-dependent recovery models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B- Methodological 58: 763–774MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Catchpole EA, Morgan BJT, Freeman SN (1998) Estimation in parameter-redundant models. Biometrika 85:462–468CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. Catchpole EA, Kgosi PM, Morgan BJT (2001) On the near-singularity of models for animal recovery data. Biometrics 57:720–726CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Catchpole EA, Morgan BJT, Viallefont A (2002) Solving problems in parameter redundancy using computer algebra. Journal of Applied Statistics 29:625–636CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Choquet R, Reboulet AM, Pradel R, Gimenez O, Lebreton JD (2004) M-SURGE: new software specifically designed for multistate capture-recapture models. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 27:207–215Google Scholar
  13. Clobert J, Lebreton J-D, Allaine D, Gaillard JM (1994) The estimation of age-specific breeding probabilities from recaptures or resightings in vertebrate populations: II. Longitudinal models. Biometrics 50:375–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crespin L, Harris MP, Lebreton J-D, Frederikesen M, Wanless S (2006) Recruitment to a seabird population depends on environmental factors and on population size. Journal of Animal Ecology 75:228–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Croxall J, Prince P, Rothery P, Wood AG (1998) Population changes in albatrosses at South Georgia. In: Robertson G, Gales R (eds) Albatross biology and conservation. Surrey Beatty Sons Pty Ltd., Chipping Norton, NSW, pp 69–83Google Scholar
  16. Forth SA, Edvall MM (2006) User guide for MAD – a Matlab automatic differentiation toolbox. TOMLAB/MAD. Version 1.4. The forward mode. Tomlab Optimization Inc., 855 Beech St #121, San Diego, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. Fujiwara M, Caswell H (2002a) A general approach to temporary emigration in mark-recapture analysis. Ecology 83:3266–3275Google Scholar
  18. Fujiwara M, Caswell H (2002b) Estimating population projection matrices from multi-stage mark-recapture data. Ecology 83:3257–3265Google Scholar
  19. Gimenez O, Choquet R, Lebreton J-D (2003) Parameter redundancy in multi-state capture-recapture models. Biometrical Journal 45:704–722CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. Gimenez O, Viallefont A, Catchpole EA, Choquet R, Morgan BJT (2004) Methods for investigating parameter redundancy. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 27:561–572Google Scholar
  21. Golub GH, Van Loan CF (1996) Matrix computations. Third edition. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MDGoogle Scholar
  22. Griewank A (2000) Evaluating derivatives: applications of algorithmic differentiation. SIAM, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
  23. Griewank A (2003) A Mathematical view of automatic differentiation. Acta Numerica 12:321–398CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. Hirsch MW, Smale S (1974) Differential equations, dynamical systems, and linear algebra. Academic Press, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Hunter CM, Caswell H (2005) Selective harvest of sooty shearwater chicks: effects on population dynamics and sustainability. Journal of Animal Ecology 74:589–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hunter CM, Moller H, Fletcher D (2000) Parameter uncertainty and elasticity analyses of a population model: setting research priorities for shearwaters. Ecological Modelling 134:299–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kendall WL, Nichols JD (1995) On the use of secondary capture–recapture samples to estimate temporary emigration and breeding proportions. Journal of Applied Statistics 22:751–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kendall WL, Bjorkland R (2001) Using open robust design models to estimate temporary emigration from capture–recapture data. Biometrics 57:1113–1122CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. Kendall WL, Nichols JD (2002) Estimating state-transition probabilities for unobservable states using capture–recapture/resighting data. Ecology 83:3276–3284Google Scholar
  30. Kendall WL, Nichols JD, Hines JE (1997) Estimating temporary emigration using capture–recapture data with Pollock’s robust design. Ecology 78:563–578Google Scholar
  31. Kery M, Gregg KB, Schaub M (2005) Demographic estimation methods for plants with unobservable life-states. Oikos 108:307–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lebreton J-D, Pradel R (2002) Multistate recapture models: modelling incomplete individual histories. Journal of Applied Statistics 29:353–369CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. Lebreton J-D, Burnham KP, Clobert J, Anderson DR (1992) Modeling survival and testing biological hypotheses using marked animals: a unified approach with case studies. Ecological Monographs 62:67–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lebreton J-D, Almeras T, Pradel R (1999) Competing events, mixtures of information, and multistratum recapture models. Bird Study 46:S39–S46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 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: 273–282CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. Magnus JR, Neudecker H (1988) Matrix differential calculus with applications in statistics and econometrics. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. Morgan BJT, Freeman SN (1989) A model with first-year variation for ring-recovery data. Biometrics 45:1087–1101CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. Murota K (2003) Matrices and matroids for ststems analysis. Springe-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Nichols JD, Sauer JR, Pollock KH, Hestbeck JB (1992) Estimating transition probabilities for stage-based population projection matrices using capture–recapture data. Ecology 73:306–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pradel R, Lebreton J-D (1999) Comparison of different approaches to the study of local recruitment of breeders. Bird Study 46(Supplement):74–81Google Scholar
  41. Rouan L, Choquet R, Pradel R (unpublished) A general framework for modeling memory in capture–recapture data. Submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  42. Schwarz CJ, Arnason AN (2000) Estimation of age-specific breeding probabilities from capture-recapture data. Biometrics 56:59–64CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Schwarz CJ, Stobo WT (1997) Estimating temporary migration using the robust design. Biometrics 53:178–194CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. Shampine LF, Ketzscher R, Forth SA (2005) Using AD to solve BVPs in MATLAB. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software 31:79–94CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  45. Spendelow JA, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Lebreton J-D, Pradel R (2002) Modeling post-fledging survival and age-specific breeding probabilities in species with delayed maturity: a case study of Roseate terns at Faulkner Island, Connecticut. Journal of Applied Statistics 29:385–405CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  46. Stewart GW (1991) Perturbation theory for the singular value decomposition. in Vaccaro RJ (ed) SVD and signal processing II: algorithms, analysis, and implementation. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  47. Stewart GW (1992) Determining rank in the presence of error. In: Moonen MS, Golub GH, de Moor BL (eds) Linear algebra for large scale and real-time applications. Kluwer, DordrecthGoogle Scholar
  48. Weimerskirch H, Clobert J, Jouventin P (1987) Survival in five southern albatrosses and its relationship with their life history. Journal of Animal Ecology 56:1043–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wonham WM (1985) Linear multivariate control: a geometric approach. Third edition. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology and Wildlife Institute of Arctic BiologyUniversity of Alaska FairbanksUSA

Personalised recommendations