A Hierarchical Covariate Model for Detection, Availability and Abundance of Florida Manatees at a Warm Water Aggregation Site

  • Christopher J. Fonnesbeck
  • Holly H. Edwards
  • John E. ReynoldsIII
Part of the Environmental and Ecological Statistics book series (ENES, volume 3)

Abstract

We constructed a Bayesian hierarchical model for estimating the population size and associated probabilities of availability and conditional detection for Florida manatees aggregating during winter, based on a series of monitoring flights over 3 years, 2001–2003. Building upon the findings of Edwards et al. (2007), our approach combines four sources of monitoring data in a single integrated modeling framework to estimate all model parameters simultaneously. Population size was modeled as a function of availability and detection, which in turn were estimated with covariate models consisting of environmental predictor variables. Previous work estimating manatee abundance from aerial surveys have either serially combined parameters estimated in separate models (Edwards et al. 2007), modeled availability and detection jointly (Craig and Reynolds 2004) or ignored detection bias altogether. Time-specific estimates of availability were high, with some variation among flight series, while estimates of conditional detection were extremely variable from one survey to the next. We obtained improved precision in our estimates of population size relative to Edwards et al. (2007). Our results emphasize the consequences of ignoring detection bias when interpreting survey counts. We hope that this research will be influential in the design of a new state-wide aerial survey monitoring program for Florida manatees.

References

  1. Ackerman B (1995) Aerial surveys of manatees: A summary and progress report. In: O’Shea T, Ackerman B, Percival H, (eds) Population Biology of the Florida Manatee, pages 13–33. National Biological Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson D (2001) The need to get the basics right in wildlife field studies. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29(4):1294–1297.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson D (2003) Response to engeman: Index values rarely constitute reliable information. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31(1):288–291.Google Scholar
  4. Bengtson J (1981) Ecology of Manatees (Trichechus manatus) in the St. Johns River, Florida. PhD thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  5. Caughley G (1977) Analysis of Vertebrate Populations. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Craig B, Reynolds J (2004) Determination of manatee population trends along the atlantic coast of florida using a bayesian approach with temperature-adjusted aerial survey data. Marine Mammal Science 20(3):386–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Deutsch C, Bonde R, Reid J (1998) Radio-tracking manatees from land and space: Tag design, implementation, and lessons learned from long-term study. Marine Technology Society Journal 32:18–29.Google Scholar
  8. Deutsch C, Reid J, Bonde R, Easton D, Kochman H, O’Shea T (2003) Seasonal movements, migratory behavior, and site fidelity of west indian manatees along the atlantic coast of the united states. Wildlife Monographs 151:1–77.Google Scholar
  9. Eberhardt L (1982) Censusing Manatees. Technical Report 8-1, Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.Google Scholar
  10. Edwards H, Pollock K, Ackerman B, Reynolds J, Powell J (2007) Components of detection probability in manatee aerial surveys during winter. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(6):2052–2060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gamerman D (1997) Markov Chain Monte Carlo: Statistical Simulation for Bayesian Inference. Chapman and Hall, London, first edition.Google Scholar
  12. Garrott R, Ackerman B, Cary J, Heisey D, Reynolds III J, Wilcox J (1995) Assessment of trends in sizes of manatee populations at several florida aggregation sites. In: O’Shea T, Ackerman B, Percival H, editors, Population Biology of the Florida Manatee pages 34–35. National Biological Service.Google Scholar
  13. Garrott RA, Ackerman B, Cary J, Heisey D, Reynolds III J, Rose P, Wilcox J (1994) Trends in counts of manatees at winter aggregation sites. Journal of Wildlife Management 58:642–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gelman A, Meng X, Stern H (1996) Posterior predicitive assessment of model fitness via realized discrepencies with discussion. Statistica Sinica 6:733–807.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Geweke J (1992) Evaluating the accuracy of sampling-based approaches to calculating posterior moments. In Bernardo J, Berger J, Dawid A, Smith J, editors, Bayesian Statistics 4, pages 169–193. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  16. Gilks W, Richardson S, Spiegelhalter D (1996) Introducing Markov chain Monte Carlo, chapter 1, pages 1–19. Interdisciplinary Statistics Series. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
  17. Hartman D (1974) Distribution, Status and Conservation of the Manatee in the United States. Document PB 81-140725, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.Google Scholar
  18. Hartman D (1979) Ecology and behavior of the manatee (Trichechus Manatus) in florida. American Society of Mammalogy Special Publications 5.Google Scholar
  19. Irvine A (1982) West indian manatee. In Davis D, editor, CRC Handbook of Census Methods for Terrestrial Vertebrates, pages 241–242. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
  20. Lefebvre L, Ackerman B, Portier K, Pollock K (1995) Aerial survey as a technique for estimating trends in manatee population size – problems and prospects. In O’Shea T, Ackerman B, Percival H, editors, Population Biology of the Florida Manatee, pages 63–74. National Biological Service Information and Technology Report 1. U.S. Department of the Interior.Google Scholar
  21. Marsh H, Sinclair D (1989) Correcting for visibility bias in strip transect aerial surveys of aquatic fauna. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:1017–1024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Packard J, Frohlich R, Reynolds III J, Wilcox J (1989) Manatee response to interruption of a thermal effluent. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:692–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Packard J, Summers R, Barnes L (1985) Variation of visibility bias during aerial surveys of manatees. Journal of Wildlife Management 49:347–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pollock K, Kendall W (1987) Visibility bias in aerial surveys: A review of estimation procedures. Journal of Wildlife Management 51:502–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pollock K, Marsh H, Bailey L, Farnsworth G, Simons T, Alldredge M (2004) Separating components of detection probability in abundance estimation: An overview with diverse examples. In: Thompson W, editor, Sampling Rare or Elusive Species: Concepts, Designs, and Techniques for Estimating Population Parameters, pages 43–58. Island Press, New York.Google Scholar
  26. Pollock K, Marsh H, Lawler I, Alldredge M (2006) Estimating animal abundance in heterogeneous environments: An application to aerial surveys of dugong. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:255–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reynolds III J, Wilcox J (1994) Observations of florida manatees (Trichechus Manatus Latirostris) around selected power plants in winter. Marine Mammal Science 10:163–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ross S (1996) Stochastic Processes. Wiley and Sons, New York, second edition.Google Scholar
  29. Shane S (1984) Manatee use of power plant effluents in brevard county, florida. Florida Scientist 47:180–187.Google Scholar
  30. Spiegelhalter D, Best N, Carlin B, van der Linde A (2002) Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 64:583–639.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2001) Florida Manatee Recovery Plan, (Trichechus manatus latirostris), third revision. Technical report, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  32. Weigle B, Wright I, Ross M, Flamm R (2001) Movements of Radio-tagged Manatees in Tampa Bay and Along Florida’s West Coast, from 1991 to 1996. Technical Report TR-7, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, FL.Google Scholar
  33. Wright I, Reynolds III J, Ackerman B, Ward L, Weigle B, Szelistowski W (2002) Trends in manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris) counts and habitat use in tampa bay, 1987-1994: Implications for conservation. Marine Mammal Science 18:259–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher J. Fonnesbeck
    • 1
  • Holly H. Edwards
  • John E. ReynoldsIII
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsUniversity of OtagoNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations