No abstract

Summary1. An index-calibration experiment involves rigorous estimation of animal abundance at a small scale to calibrate a less rigorously derived index of abundance. The efficacy of such index-calibration experiments has been a matter of much controversy. In this study, we develop theoretical models and test them with empirical data on large-scale index-calibration experiments on tigers Panthera tigris to advance our understanding of this controversy. 2. We propose two models that describe the sampling processes involved in typical index-calibration experiments. Using analytical derivations and some simulations, we evaluate the relative roles of these sampling parameters on the R 2 (coefficient of determination) statistic -a common inferential tool used in such calibration experiments. 3. We make predictions about the R 2 statistic using our theoretical derivations and estimates from large-scale occupancy surveys of tigers in India. We then compare our predictions with empirical estimates of two tiger sign index-calibration experiments (IC-Karanth and IC-Jhala). 4. Our theoretical models show that the R 2 statistic increases when individual-specific detection probability is high and is constant, increases when the variance-to-mean ratio of abundance increases, increases when precision of abundance estimates improves and declines when mean abundance increases. All predictions about the two index-calibration experiments showed a poor performance of the R 2 statistic (R 2 < 0Á40). Inference from ICKaranth was extremely poor (R 2 ¼ 0Á0004) and comparable to model predictions (P value = 0Á0754). Anomalously (P value < 0Á0001), inference from IC-Jhala was exceedingly high (R 2 ¼ 0Á95). 5. Our study shows that such direct index-calibration experiments using the R 2 statistic yield poor inferences unless all the sampling process parameters lie within a limited range. Ignoring the consequence of the effect of these parameters during survey design could result in expenditure of huge resources with little gain in ecological inference. Analysis using joint likelihood models, with appropriate survey designs, may be more fruitful than clinging on to such composite, direct R 2 -based models.

A productive way forward in studies of animal populations is to efficiently make use of all the information available, either as raw data or as published sources, on critical parameters of interest. In this study, we demonstrate two approaches to the use of multiple sources of information on a parameter of fundamental interest to ecologists: animal density. The first approach produces estimates simultaneously from two different sources of data. The second approach was developed for situations in which initial data collection and analysis are followed up by subsequent data collection and prior knowledge is updated with new data using a stepwise process. Both approaches are used to estimate density of a rare and elusive predator, the tiger, by combining photographic and fecal DNA spatial capture-recapture data. The model, which combined information, provided the most precise estimate of density (8.5 +/- 1.95 tigers/100 km2 [posterior mean +/- SD]) relative to a model that utilized only one data source (photographic, 12.02 +/- 3.02 tigers/100 km2 and fecal DNA, 6.65 +/- 2.37 tigers/100 km2). Our study demonstrates that, by accounting for multiple sources of available information, estimates of animal density can be significantly improved.

No abstract

No abstract