Environmental and Ecological Statistics

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 435–451 | Cite as

Hierarchical modeling of abundance in closed population capture–recapture models under heterogeneity

  • Matthew R. Schofield
  • Richard J. Barker


Hierarchical modeling of abundance in space or time using closed-population mark-recapture under heterogeneity (model \(\hbox {M}_{\text {h}}\)) presents two challenges: (i) finding a flexible likelihood in which abundance appears as an explicit parameter and (ii) fitting the hierarchical model for abundance. The first challenge arises because abundance not only indexes the population size, it also determines the dimension of the capture probabilities in heterogeneity models. A common approach is to use data augmentation to include these capture probabilities directly into the likelihood and fit the model using Bayesian inference via Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC). Two such examples of this approach are (i) explicit trans-dimensional MCMC, and (ii) superpopulation data augmentation. The superpopulation approach has the advantage of simple specification that is easily implemented in BUGS and related software. However, it reparameterizes the model so that abundance is no longer included, except as a derived quantity. This is a drawback when hierarchical models for abundance, or related parameters, are desired. Here, we analytically compare the two approaches and show that they are more closely related than might appear superficially. We exploit this relationship to specify the model in a way that allows us to include abundance as a parameter and that facilitates hierarchical modeling using readily available software such as BUGS. We use this approach to model trends in grizzly bear abundance in Yellowstone National Park from 1986 to 1998.


Bayesian Capture recapture Complete data likelihood  Data augmentation Hierarchical MCMC Reversible jump Superpopulation Trans-dimensional 



M.R.S. was partially funded by NSF Grants Nos. 0934516 and 0814194.

Supplementary material

10651_2013_262_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (192 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (pdf 191 KB)


  1. Agresti A (1994) Simple capture-recapture models permitting unequal catchability and variable sampling effort. Biometrics 50:494–500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailey LL, Converse SJ, Kendall WL (2010) Bias, precision, and parameter redundancy in complex multistate models with unobservable states. Ecology 91(6):1598–1604PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartolucci F, Forcina A (2001) Analysis of capture–recapture data with a Rasch-type model allowing for conditional dependence and multidimensionality. Biometrics 57(3):714–719PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartolucci F, Forcina A (2006) A class of latent marginal models for capture–recapture data with continuous covariates. J Am Stat Assoc 101(474):786–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartolucci F, Mira A, Scaccia L (2003) Answering two biological questions with a latent class model via MCMC applied to capture-recapture data. Appl Bayesian Stat Stud Biol Med 7Google Scholar
  6. Boyce MS, MacKenzie DI, Manly BFJ, Haroldson MA, Moody D (2001) Negative binomial models for abundance estimation of multiple closed populations. J Wildl Manag 65:498–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brooks SP, Gelman A (1998) General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. J Comput Graph Stat 7(4):434–455Google Scholar
  8. Burnham KP, Overton WS (1978) Estimation of the size of a closed population when capture probabilities vary among animals. Biometrika 65:625–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carlin B, Chib S (1995) Bayesian model choice via Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. J Royal Stat Soc Series B 57(3):473–484Google Scholar
  10. Chib S (1995) Marginal likelihood from the Gibbs output. J Am Stat Assoc 90(432):1313–1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dempster AP, Laird NM, Rubin DB (1977) Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J Royal Stat Soc B 39:1–38Google Scholar
  12. Durban JW, Elston DA (2005) Mark-recapture with occasion and individual effects: abundance estimation through Bayesian model selection in a fixed dimensional parameter spaces. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 10:291–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Farcomeni A, Tardella L (2010) Reference Bayesian methods for recapture models with heterogeneity. Test 19(1):187–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fienberg S, Johnson M, Junker B (1999) Classical multilevel and Bayesian approaches to population size estimation using multiple lists. J Royal Stat Soc Series A (Stat Soc) 162(3):383–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gelman A (2004) Parameterization and Bayesian modeling. J Am Stat Assoc 99(466):537–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gelman A (2006) Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models. Bayesian Anal 1:515–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB (2004) Bayesian data analysis, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall/CRC, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Geman S, Geman D (1984) Stochastic relaxation, Gibbs distributions and the Bayesian restoration of images. IEEE Trans Patt Anal Mach Intell 6:721–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gimenez O, Choquet R (2010) Individual heterogeneity in studies on marked animals using numerical integration: capture-recapture mixed models. Ecology 91(4):951–957PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Godsill SJ (2001) On the relationship between Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for model uncertainty. J Comput Graph Stat 10(2):230–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goodman LA (1974) Exploratory latent structure analysis using both identifiable and unidentifiable models. Biometrika 61(2):215–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Green PJ (1995) Reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo computation and Bayesian model determination. Biometrika 82(4):711–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hook EB, Albright SG, Cross PK (1980) Use of Bernoulli census and log-linear methods for estimating the prevalence of spina bifida in livebirths and the completeness of vital record reports in New York State. Am J Epidemiol 112(6):750–758PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. King R, Brooks SP (2008) On the Bayesian estimation of a closed population size in the presence of heterogeneity and model uncertainty. Biometrics 64(3):816–824PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Levine RA, Casella G (2001) Implementations of the Monte Carlo EM algorithm. J Comput Graph Stat 10(3):422–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Link WA, Barker RJ (2010) Bayesian inference with ecological applications. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Liu JS, Wu YN (1999) Parameter expansion for data augmentation. J Am Stat Assoc 94:1264–1274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lunn D, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D (2000) WinBUGS: a Bayesian modelling framework—concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat Comput 10:325–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Lachman GB, Droege S, Royle JA, Langtimm C (2002) Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecology 83:2248–2255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Madigan D, York J (1997) Bayesian methods for estimation of the size of a closed population. Biometrika 84(1):19–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Otis DL, Burnham KP, White GC, Anderson DR (1978) Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal populations. Wildl Monogr 62:1–135Google Scholar
  32. Plummer M (2003) JAGS: a program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on distributed statistical computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  33. Pollock KH (1982) A capture–recapture design robust to unequal probability of capture. J Wildl Manag 46(3):752–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Royle JA (2008) Modeling individual effects in the Cormack-Jolly-Seber model: a state-space formulation. Biometrics 64(2):364–370PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Royle JA, Dorazio RM (2012) Parameter-expanded data augmentation for Bayesian analysis of capture–recapture models. J Ornithol 152:521–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Royle JA, Dorazio RM, Link WA (2007) Analysis of multinomial models with unknown index using data augmentation. J Comput Graph Stat 16:67–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Royle J, Dorazio R (2008) Hierarchical modeling and inference in ecology: the analysis of data from populations, metapopulations and communities. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  38. Sanathanan L (1972) Estimating the size of a multinomial population. Ann Math Stat 43(1):142–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schofield MR, Barker RJ (2011) Full open population capture–recapture models with individual covariates. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 16:253–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sisson SA (2005) Transdimensional Markov chains. J Am Stat Assoc 100(471):1077–1089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stanghellini E, van der Heijden PGM (2004) A multiple-record systems estimation method that takes observed and unobserved heterogeneity into account. Biometrics 60(2):510–516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tardella L (2002) A new Bayesian method for nonparametric capture-recapture models in presence of heterogeneity. Biometrika 89(4):807–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of StatisticsColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of StatisticsUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations