Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Modeling Demographic Processes In Marked Populations pp 131–152Cite as

Application of Capture–Recapture to Addressing Questions in Evolutionary Ecology

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Environmental and Ecological Statistics ((ENES,volume 3))

Abstract

Capture–recapture (CR) is one of the most commonly used methods in quantitative ecology. Until recently, much of the emphasis of CR was on the estimation of abundance and vital rates, especially survival rates. Here, I discuss several important advances that have enhanced ecologists’ ability to address questions in evolutionary ecology. Generalizations of CR methodology to include group and covariate effects have allowed direct, empirical modeling of the influence of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on demographic rates. Advances in sampling design and software now allow CR modeling to address questions such as dispersal and natal fidelity, tradeoffs between reproductive effort and survival, senescence, and variability in demographic rates in relation to individual traits, among others. Furthermore, complex ecological and evolutionary questions seem to be especially amenable to a paradigm of multiple alternative (vs. single null) hypotheses, which is consistent both with information-theoretic and Bayesian approaches to inference.

Previous CR approaches have emphasized the estimation of averages of demographic parameters for individuals grouped into classes (age, sex, size or other attributes), but evolutionary questions tend to emphasize individual variability, with fitness “parameters” best characterized by frequency distributions. Bayesian approaches are particularly appropriate for modeling individual, temporal, spatial, and other components of variation via random effects models. Finally, Bayesian methods and conditional/hierarchical modeling allow for ready construction of complex models of life history from a variety of data sources. I present selected examples to illustrate each of these major points.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akaike H (1973) Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petran BN, Csaaki F (eds), Second International Symposium on Information Theory. Akdèemiai Kiadi, Budapest, Hungary, pp 267–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alisauskas RT, Lindberg MS (2002) Effects of neckbands on survival and fidelity of white-fronted and Canada geese captured as non-breeding adults. Journal of Applied Statistics 29:521–537.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Arnason AN (1972) Parameter estimates from mark-recapture experiments on two populations subject to migration and death. Research on Population Ecology. 15:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnason AN (1973) The estimation of population size, migration rates, and survival in a stratified population. Research on Population Ecology 13:97–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnason AN, Schwarz CJ (1999) Using POPAN-5 to analyse banding data. Bird Study 46: S157–S168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey LL, Kendall WL, Church DR, Wilbur HM (1995) Estimating survival and breeding probability for pond-breeding amphibians: a modified robust design. Ecology 85:2456–2466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Blums P, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Lindberg MS, Mednis A (2005) Individual quality survival variation and patterns of phenotypic selection on body condition and timing of nesting in birds. Oecologia 143:365–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blums P, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Mednis A (2002) Sources of variation in survival and breeding site fidelity in three species of European ducks. Journal of Animal Ecology 71:438–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks SP, Catchpole EA, Morgan BJT, Barry SC (2000) On the Bayesian analysis of ring-recovery data. Biometrics 56:951–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown CR, Brown MB (1998) Fitness components associated with alternative reproductive tactics in cliff swallows. Behavioral Ecology 9:158–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multi-model inference. Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP (1993) A theory for combined analysis of ring recovery and recapture data. In: Lebreton JD, North PM (eds), The study of bird population dynamics using marked individuals. Birkhauser-Verlag, Berlin, pp 199–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, White GC (2002) Evaluation of some random effects methodology applicable to bird ringing data. Journal of Applied Statistics 29:245–264.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cam E, Monnat JY (2000) Apparent inferiority of first-time breeders in the Kittiwake: the role of heterogeneity among age classes. Journal of Animal Ecology 69:380–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cam E, Link WA, Cooch EG, Monnat J-Y, Danchin E (2002) Individual covariation in life history traits: seeing the trees despite the forest. American Naturalist 159:96–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cam E, Monnat JY, Hines JE (2003) Long-term fitness consequences of early conditions in the kittiwake. Journal of Animal Ecology 72:411–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cam E, Monnat JY, Royle JA (2004) Dispersal and individual quality in a long lived species. OIKOS 106:386–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caswell H (2001) Matrix population models:construction analysis and interpretation. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlin TC (1897) The method of multiple working hypotheses. Journal of Geology 5: 837–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choquet R, Reboulet AM, Pradel R, Gimenez O, Lebreton JD (2003) User's manual for U-Care. Mimeographed document, CEFE/CNRS, Montpellier, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 27:207–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clobert J (1995) Capture–recapture and evolutionary ecology: a difficult wedding? Journal of Applied Statistics 22: 989–1008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conroy MJ, Fonnesbeck CJ, Zimpfer NL (2005) Modeling regional waterfowl harvest rates using Markov chain Monte Carlo. Journal of Wildlife Management 69:77–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conroy MJ, Senar JC, Domènech J (2002) Analysis of individual- and time-specific covariate effects on survival of Serinus serinus in north-eastern Spain. Journal of Applied Statistics 29:125–142.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cooch EG, Cam E, Link W (2002) Occam’s shadow: levels of analysis in evolutionary ecology—where to next? Journal of Applied Statistics 29:19–48.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

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

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Danchin E, Cam E (2002) Can non-breeding be a cost of breeding dispersal? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 51:153–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doherty PF, Nichols JD, Tautin J, Voelzer JF, Smith GW, Benning DS, Bentley VR, Bidwell JK, Bollinger KS, Brazda AR, Buelna EK, Goldsberry JR, King RJ, Roetker FH, Solberg JW, Thorpe PP, Wortham JS (2002) Sources of variation in breeding-ground fidelity of mallards (Anas platyrhynchos). Behavioral Ecology 13:543–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonnesbeck CJ, Conroy MJ (2004) Application of integrated Bayesian modeling and Markov chain Monte Carlo methods to the conservation of a harvested species. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 27:267–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosbois V, Tavecchia G (2003) Modeling dispersal with capture-recapture data: disentangling decisions of leaving and settlement. Ecology 84:1225–1236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Karanth KU, Nichols JD (1998) Estimation of tiger densities in India using photographic capture and recaptures. Ecology 79:2852–2862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyser AJ (2003) Life history, demography, and individual variation in western bluebirds. PhD Disseration, University of Georgia, Athens, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • King R, Brooks SP (2001) On the Bayesian analysis of population size. Biometrika 88:317–336.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lebreton JD, Burnham KP, Clobert J, Anderson DR (1992) Modeling survival and testing biological hypotheses using marked animals – a unified approach with case-studies. Ecological Monographs 62:67–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lebreton JD, Hines JE, Pradel R, Nichols JD, Spendelow JA (2003) Estimation by capture–recapture of recruitment and dispersal over several sites. OIKOS 101:253–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg MS, Sedinger JS, Derksen DV, Rockwell RF (1998) Natal and breeding philopatry in a Black Brant, Branta bernicla nigricans, metapopulation. Ecology 79:1893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link WA, Cam E, Nichols JD, Cooch EG (2002) Of BUGS and birds: Markov chain Monte Carlo for hierarchical modeling in wildlife research. Journal of Wildlife Management 66: 277–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link WA, Barker RJ (2004) Hierarchical mark-recapture models: a framework for inferences about demographic processes. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 27:441–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link WA, Barker RJ (2006) Model weights and the foundations of multimodel inference. Ecology 87:2626–2635.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Kendall WA (1995) The use of multi-state capture-recapture models to address questions in evolutionary ecology. Journal of Applied Statistics 22:835–846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Hines JE, Pollock KH, Hinz RL, Link WA (1994) Estimating breeding proportions and testing hypotheses about costs of reproduction with capture–recapture data. Ecology 75: 2052–2065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Hines JE, Lebreton J-D, Pradel R (2000) Estimation of contributions to population growth: a reverse-time capture-recapture approach. Ecology 81:3362–3376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Hines JE (2002) Approaches for the direct estimation of lambda, and demographic contributions to lambda, using capture–recapture data. Journal of Applied Statistics 29: 539–568.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Orell M, Belda EJ (2002) Delayed cost of reproduction and senescence in the willow tit Parus montanus. Journal of Animal Ecology 71:55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH (1982) A capture–recapture design robust to unequal probability of capture. Journal of Wildlife Management 46:757–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH, Nichols JD, Brownie C, Hines JE (1990) Statistical inference for capture–recapture Wildife Monographs 107:70 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH, Solomon DL, Robson DS (1974) Tests for mortality and recruitment in a K-sample tag-recapture experiment. Biometrics 30:77–87.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Powell LA, Conroy MJ, Hines JE, Nichols JD, Krementz DG (2000) Simultaneous us of mark-recaptuer and radio telemetry to estimate survival, movement, and capture rates. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:302–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradel R (1996) Utilization of capture-mark-recapture for the study of recruitment and population growth rate. Biometrics 52:703–709.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Pradel R, Lebreton J-D (1991) Users manual for program SURGE version 4.1. C.E.F.E. C.N.R.S Montpelier France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed ET, Gauthier G, Pradel R, Lebreton J-D (2003) Age and environmental conditions affect recruitment in greater snow geese. Ecology 84:219–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivalan P, Prevot-Julliard AC, Choquet R, Pradel R, Jacquemin B, Girondot M (2005) Trade-off between current reproductive effort and delay to next reproduction in the leatherback sea turtle. Oecologia 145:564–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royle A, Link WA (2002) Random effects and shrinkage estimation in capture–recapture models. Journal of Applied Statistics 29: 329–351.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Runge JP, Runge MC, Nichols JD (2006) The role of local populations within a landscape context: defining and classifying sources and sinks. American Naturalist 167:925–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz CJ, Schweigert JF, Arnason AN (1993) Estimating migration rates using tag recovery data. Biometrics 49:177–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Senar JC, Borras A, Cabrera J, Cabrera T, Björklund M (2006) Local differentiaion in the presence of gene flow in the citril finch Serinus citronella. Biology Letters 11:85–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senar JC, Conroy MJ (2004) Multi-state analysis of the impacts of avian pox on a population of Serins (Serinus serinus): the importance of estimating recapture rates. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 27:133–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senar JC, Conroy MJ, Borras A (2002) Assymetric exchange between populations differing in habitat quality: a metapopulation study on the citril finch. Journal of Applied Statistics 29: 425–441.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Skalski JR, Hoffman A, Smith SG (1993) Testing the significance of individual and cohort-level covariates in animals survival studies. The study of bird population dynamics using marked individuals. (J.-D. Lebreton & North PM, editors) Birkhauser Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith SG, Skalski JR, Schlecte W, Hoffman A, Cassen V (1994) SURPH.1 Manual. Statistical survival analysis for fish and wildlife tagging studies. Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR.

    Google Scholar 

  • White GC, Burnham, KP (1999) Program MARK: survival rate estimation from both live and dead encounters. Bird Study 46:S120–S139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams BK, Nichols JD, Conroy MJ (2002) Analysis and management of animal populations. Elsevier-Academic, Amsertdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoccoz NG, Erikstad KE, Butnes JO, Hannsen SA, Tveraa, T (2002) Costs of reproduction in common eiders (Somateria mollissima): an assessment of relationships between reproductive effort and future survival and reproduction based on observational and experimental studies. Journal of Applied Statistics 29:57–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimpfer NL, Conroy, MJ (2006) Modeling movement and fidelity of American black ducks. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1770–1777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. USGS, Georgia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, D. B. Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA

    Michael J. Conroy

Authors
  1. Michael J. Conroy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Conroy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Konrad-Zuse Strasse 1, D18057 Rostock, Germany

    David L Thomson

  2. Netherlands Institute of Ecology Centre for Terrestrial Ecology, Boterhoeksestraat 48, Postbus 40, 6666 ZG Heteren, Netherlands

    David L Thomson

  3. School of Biological Sciences, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong

    David L Thomson

  4. Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

    Evan G. Cooch

  5. D.B. Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

    Michael J. Conroy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Conroy, M.J. (2009). Application of Capture–Recapture to Addressing Questions in Evolutionary Ecology. In: Thomson, D.L., Cooch, E.G., Conroy, M.J. (eds) Modeling Demographic Processes In Marked Populations. Environmental and Ecological Statistics, vol 3. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-78151-8_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation