Skip to main content
Log in

Estimating demographic parameters for capture–recapture data in the presence of multiple mark types

  • Published:
Environmental and Ecological Statistics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In mark-recapture studies, various techniques can be used to uniquely identify individual animals, such as ringing, tagging or photo-identification using natural markings. In some long-term studies more than one type of marking procedure may be implemented during the study period. In these circumstances, ignoring the different mark types can produce biased survival estimates since the assumption that the different mark types are equally catchable (homogeneous capture probability across mark types) may be incorrect. We implement an integrated approach where we simultaneously analyse data obtained using three different marking techniques, assuming that animals can be cross-classified across the different mark types. We discriminate between competing models using the AIC statistic. This technique also allows us to estimate both relative mark-loss probabilities and relative recapture efficiency rates for the different marking methods. We initially perform a simulation study to explore the different biases that can be introduced if we assume a homogeneous recapture probability over mark type, before applying the method to a real dataset. We make use of data obtained from an intensive long-term observational study of UK female grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) at a single breeding colony, where three different methods are used to identify individuals within a single study: branding, tagging and photo-identification based on seal coat pattern or pelage.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical identification model. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19: 716–723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrowman NJ, Myers RA (1996) Estimating tag-shedding rates for experiments with multiple tag types. Biometrics 52: 1410–1416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd JM, Laws RM (1962) Observations on the Grey Seal (Halichoerus grypus) at North Rona in 1960. In: Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, vol 164, pp 469–512

  • Bradshaw CJA, Barker RJ, Davis LS (2000) Modeling tag loss in New Zealand fur seal pups. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 5: 475–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catchpole EA, Morgan BJT, Viallefont A (2002) Solving problems in parameter redundancy using computer algebra. J Appl Stat 29: 625–636

    Article  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowen L, Schwarz CJ (2006) The Jolly?-Seber model with tag loss. Biometrics 62: 699–705

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cowen L, Walsh SJ, Schwarz CJ, Cadigan N, Morgan J (2009) Estimating exploitation rates of migrating yellowtail flounder (Limanda Ferruginea) using multistate mark-recapture methods incorporating tag loss and variable reporting rates. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 66: 1245–1255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diefenbach DR, Alt GL (1998) Modeling and evaluation of ear tag loss in black bears. J Wildl Manag 62: 1292–1300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duck CS, Mackey BL (2005) Grey seal pup production in Britain in 2004. Scientific advice on matters related to the management of seal populations: 2005

  • Gerondeau M, Barbraud C, Ridoux V, Vincent C (2007) Abundance estimate and seasonal patterns of grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) occurence in Brittany, France, as assessed by photo-identification and capture-mark-recapture. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 97: 365–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiby L, Lovell P (1990) Computer aided matching of natural markings: a prototype system for grey seals. Technical report, International Whaling Commission, Special issue 12

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

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kremers WK (1988) Estimation of survival rates from a mark-recapture study with tag loss. Biometrics 44: 117–130

    Article  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. Ecol Monogr 62: 67–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy MA, Parris KM (2004) Clarifying the effect of toe clipping on frogs with Bayesian statistics. J Appl Ecol 41: 780–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMahon CR, White GC (2009) Tag loss probabilities are not independent: assessing and quantifying the assumption of independent tag transition probabilities from direct observations. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 372: 36–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meijer T, Noren K, Hellstrom P, Dalen L, Angerbjorn A (2008) Estimating population parameters in a threatened arctic fox population using molecular tracking and traditional field methods. Anim Conserv 11: 330–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pledger S, Pollock KH, Norris JL (2003) Open capture–recapture models with heterogeneity: I. Cormack–Jolly–Seber model. Biometrics 59: 786–794

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock K, Hoenig JM, Hearn WS, Callingaert B (2001) Tag reporting rate estimation 1. An evaluation of the high-reward tagging method. N Am J Fish Manag 21: 521–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomeroy PP, Fedak MA, Anderson SS, Rothery P (1999) Consequences of maternal size for reproductive expenditure and pupping success of grey seals at North Rona, Scotland. J Anim Ecol 68: 235–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomeroy PP, Twiss SD, Duck CD (2000) Expansion of a grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) breeding colony: change in pupping site use at the isle of May, Scotland. J Zool 250: 1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomeroy PP, Smout SC, Twiss SD, Moss S, King R (2010) Low and delayed recruitment at grey seal breeding colonies in the UK (in press)

  • Reynolds T, King R, Harwood J, Frederiksen M, Wanless S, Harris M (2009) Integrated data analyses in the presence of emigration and tag-loss. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 14: 411–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz CJ, Stobo WT (2000) Estimation of juvenile survival, adult survival, and age-specific pupping probabilities for the female grey seal (Halichoerus gryprus) on Sable Island from capture–recapture data. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 57: 247–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Seber GAF (1982) The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters, 2nd edn. Griffin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Testa JW, Rothery P (1992) Effectiveness of various cattle ear tags as markers for Weddell seals. Mar Mamm Sci 8: 344–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vincent C, Meynier L, Ridoux V (2001) Photo-identification in grey seals: legibility and stability of natural markings. Mammalia 65: 363–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiig A (1991) Demographic parameters for Norwegian grey seals, Halichoerus grypus. Fauna Norvegica Ser A 12: 25–28

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sophie Smout.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smout, S., King, R. & Pomeroy, P. Estimating demographic parameters for capture–recapture data in the presence of multiple mark types. Environ Ecol Stat 18, 331–347 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10651-010-0135-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10651-010-0135-y

Keywords

Navigation