Environmental and Ecological Statistics

, Volume 3, Issue 4, pp 311–327 | Cite as

A combination line transect and capture-recapture sampling model for multiple observers in aerial surveys

  • Russell Alpízar-Jara
  • Kenneth H. Pollock
Papers

Abstract

We present a robust sampling methodology to estimate population size using line transect and capture-recapture procedures for aerial surveys. Aerial surveys usually underestimate population density due to animals being missed. A combination of capture-recapture and line transect sampling methods with multiple observers allows violation of the assumption that all animals on the centreline are sighted from the air. We illustrate our method with an example of inanimate objects which shows evidence of failure of the assumption that all objects on the centreline have probability 1 of being detected. A simulation study is implemented to evaluate the performance of three variations of the Lincoln-Petersen estimator: the overall estimator, the stratified estimator, and the general stratified estimator based on the combined likelihood proposed in this paper. The stratified Lincoln-Petersen estimator based on the combined likelihood is found to be generally superior to the other estimators.

Keywords

detection function program DISTANCE program SURVIV visibility bias wildlife population density estimation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akaike, H. (1973) Information theory and an extension of the maximum principle. In International Symposium on Information Theory, 2nd edn (eds B. N. Petran and F. Csàaki), Akadèmiai Kiadi, Budapest, Hungary, pp. 267–81.Google Scholar
  2. Alpízar-Jara, R. (1994) A combination line transect and capture-recapture sampling model for multiple observers in aerial surveys. MS thesis, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, D.R. and Pospahala, R.S. (1970) Correction of bias in belt transect studies of immobile objects. Journal of Wildlife Management, 34, 141–6.Google Scholar
  4. Best, P.B. and Butterworth, D.S. (1980) Report of the Southern Hemisphere Minke whale assessment cruise, 1978/79. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 30, 257–83.Google Scholar
  5. Borchers, D.L., Buckland, S.T., Clarke, E.D. and Cumberworth, S.L. (1996) Horvitz-Thompson estimators for double-platform line transect surveys. (Submitted to Biometrics).Google Scholar
  6. Borchers, D.L. and Zucchini, W. (1996) Mark-recapture models for line transects surveys. (Submitted to Biometrika).Google Scholar
  7. Buckland, S.T. (1986) Estimating Minke whale density — a suggested procedure. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 36, 469–70.Google Scholar
  8. Buckland, S.T. (1987) Estimation of Minke whale numbers from the 1984/85 IWC/IDCR Antarctic sightings data. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 37, 263–8.Google Scholar
  9. Buckland, S.T. (1992a) Effects of heterogeneity on estimation of probability of detection on the trackline. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 42, 569–73.Google Scholar
  10. Buckland, S.T. (1992b) Fitting density functions using polynomials. Applied Statistics, 41, 63–76.Google Scholar
  11. Buckland, S.T. and Turnock, B.J. (1992) A robust line transect model. Biometrics, 48, 901–9.Google Scholar
  12. Buckland, S.T., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P. and Laake. J.L. (1993) Distance sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  13. Burnham, K.P., Anderson, D.R. and Laake, J.L. (1979) Robust estimation from line transect data. Journal of Wildlife Management, 43, 992–6.Google Scholar
  14. Burnham, K.P., Anderson, D.R. and Laake, J.L. (1980) Estimation of density from line transect sampling of biological populations. Wildlife Monographs, 72.Google Scholar
  15. Burnham, K.P., Anderson, D.R. and Laake, J.L. (1981) Line transect estimation of bird population density using a Fourier series. Studies in Avian Biology, 6, 466–82.Google Scholar
  16. Butterworth, D.S. and Borchers, D.L. (1988) Estimates of g(0) for Minke schools from the results of the independent observer experiment on the 1985/86 and 1986/87 IWC/IDCR Antarctic assessment cruises. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 38, 301–13.Google Scholar
  17. Butterworth, D.S., Best, P.B., and Basson, M. (1982) Results of analysis of Minke whale assessment cruise, 1980/81. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 32, 819–34.Google Scholar
  18. Butterworth, D.S., Best, P.B., and Hembree, D. (1984) Analysis of experiments carried out during the 1981/82 IWC/IDCR. Minke whale assessment cruise in Area 11. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 34, 365–92.Google Scholar
  19. Chapman, D.G. (1951) Some properties of the hypergeometric distribution with applications to zoological censuses. University of California. Publ. Stat. 1, 131–60.Google Scholar
  20. Cooke, J.G. (1985) Notes on the estimation of whale density from line transects. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 35, 273–6.Google Scholar
  21. Drummer, T.D. and McDonald, L.L. (1987) Size bias in line transect sampling. Biometrics, 43, 13–21.Google Scholar
  22. Efron, B. (1982) The Jackknife, the Bootstrap and Other Resampling Plans. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  23. Laake, J.L. (1978) Line transect estimators robust to animal movement. MS Thesis, Utah State University, Logan.Google Scholar
  24. Laake, J.L., Buckland, S.T., Anderson, D.R. and Burnham, K.P. (1993) DISTANCE User's Guide. Colorado Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.Google Scholar
  25. Manly, B.F., McDonald, L.L. and Garner, G.W. (1996) The double-count method with two independent observers. Technical paper submitted for publication to the Journal of Agriculture, Biometrics and Environmental Statistics.Google Scholar
  26. Øien, N. (1990) Estimates of g(0) for Minke whales based on an independent observer experiment during the Norwegian sightings surveys in July 1988. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 40, 331–5.Google Scholar
  27. Otis, D.L., Burnham, K.P., White, G.C. and Anderson, D.R. (1978) Statistical inference for capture data on closed animal populations. Wildlife Monographs, 62.Google Scholar
  28. Otto, M.C. and Pollock, K.H. (1990) Size bias in line transect sampling: A field test. Biometrics, 46, 239–45.Google Scholar
  29. Palka, D.L. (1993) Estimating densities of animals when assumptions of line transect surveys are violated. Ph.D. Thesis, UCLA.Google Scholar
  30. Pollock, K.H. (1978) A family of density estimators for line transect sampling. Biometrics, 34, 475–8.Google Scholar
  31. Pollock, K.H. and Kendall, W.L. (1987) Visibility bias in aerial surveys: a review of estimation procedures. Journal of Wildlife Management, 51(2), 502–10.Google Scholar
  32. Pollock, K.H, Nichols, J.D., Brownie, C. and Hines, J.E. (1990) Statistical inference for capture-recapture experiments. Wildlife Monographs, 107.Google Scholar
  33. Quinn, T.J., II (1985) Line transect estimators for school populations. Fisheries Research, 3, 189–99.Google Scholar
  34. Quang, P.X., and Lanctot, R.B. (1991) A line transect model for aerial surveys. Biometrics, 47, 1089–102.Google Scholar
  35. Schweder, T. (1990) Independent observer experiments to estimate the detection function in line transect surveys of whales. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 40, 349–55.Google Scholar
  36. Schweder, T. and Høst, G. (1992) Integrating experimental data and survey data through a simulation model to obtain estimates of g(0). Report of the International Whaling Commission, 42.Google Scholar
  37. Schweder, T., Høst, G. and Øien, N. (1991a) A note on the bias in capture-recapture type estimates of g(0) due to the fact that whales are diving. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 41, 397–9.Google Scholar
  38. Schweder, T., Høst, G. and Øien, N. (1991b) Estimates of the detection probability for shipboard surveys of Northeastern Atlantic Minke whales, based on a parallel ship experiment. Report of the International Whaling Commission, 41, 417–32.Google Scholar
  39. Seber, G.A.F. (1982) The Estimation of Animal Abundance and Related Parameters (2nd edn), Griffin, London.Google Scholar
  40. White, G.C. (1983) Numerical estimation of survival rates from band recovery and biotelemetry data. Journal of Wildlife Management, 47, 716–28.Google Scholar
  41. White, G.C., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P. and Otis, D.L. (1982) Capture-recapture and removal methods for sampling closed populations. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, USA, pp. 235.Google Scholar
  42. Zahl, S. (1989) Line transect sampling with unknown probability of detection along the transect. Biometrics, 45, 435–70.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Russell Alpízar-Jara
    • 1
  • Kenneth H. Pollock
    • 1
  1. 1.Biomathematics Graduate Program, Department of StatisticsNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations