Estimates of sex ratio require the incorporation of unequal catchability between sexes

Abstract

Context Estimates of the sex ratio of a population are a common summary statistic used for ecological studies and conservation planning. However, methods to determine the sex ratio often ignore capture probability, which can lead to a perceived bias in the sex ratio when the sexes are detected at different rates. Aims To illustrate the bias from conventional count-based analysis methods for determining sex ratio by comparison with analytical methods that include capture probability. Methods Closed-population mark–recapture analysis was used to determine the population size of each sex within a population of green and golden bell frogs (Litoria aurea). This was then compared with the traditional count-based methods of estimating sex ratio to determine the effect of incorporating capture probability on the sex ratio estimate. Key results More males than females were detected during surveys, producing a male-biased sex ratio when there was no incorporation of capture probability. Mark–recapture results indicated a similar population size between the two sexes, suggesting that the sex ratio is closer to even. Conclusions Methods to estimate sex ratio that incorporate capture probability can significantly reduce the bias obtained from count data. Implications We suggest that population studies must incorporate capture probability to determine the sex ratio of a population.

Adult sex-ratio distortion in the native European polecat is related to the expansion of the invasive American mink

“…However, the two major methodologies currently used to fit SSR to ASR are: (i) capture-mark-recapture methods (Casula and Nichols, 2003;Alho et al, 2008;Ewen et al, 2011), that allow researchers to account for individuals that are present but not sampled in a certain session. Recently, some authors suggest that estimates of ASR still need to incorporate unequal detectability/catchability between sexes into the analyses to get more realistic approaches of ASR (Amrhein et al, 2012;Pickett et al, 2012;Arendt et al, 2014); alternatively, (ii) noninvasive methods (reviewed in Waits and Paetkau, 2005; see also Palomares et al, 2012;Baumgardt et al, 2013) allow less laborious, and, likely, more accurate sex-ratio monitoring, as differences in catchability are minimized. These new methodologies will certainly help to estimate ASR in an unbiased way in future studies.…”

High Proportion of Male Faeces in Jaguar Populations

“…This further supports the idea that more male faeces are found as a result of a differential use between sexes of the routes sampled (see below). However, incorporating detectabilty analysis in future studies could help to definitively solve the question [23].…”

Modelling the population viability of a threatened amphibian with a fast life‐history

“…Recruited individuals were split equally into the two sexes due to an even sex ratio of post‐metamorphic L . aurea experienced by this population (Pickett et al ., ).…”