IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v374y2018icp51-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fitting N-mixture models to count data with unmodeled heterogeneity: Bias, diagnostics, and alternative approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Duarte, Adam
  • Adams, Michael J.
  • Peterson, James T.

Abstract

Monitoring animal populations is central to wildlife and fisheries management, and the use of N-mixture models toward these efforts has markedly increased in recent years. Nevertheless, relatively little work has evaluated estimator performance when basic assumptions are violated. Moreover, diagnostics to identify when bias in parameter estimates from N-mixture models is likely is largely unexplored. We simulated count data sets using 837 combinations of detection probability, number of sample units, number of survey occasions, and type and extent of heterogeneity in abundance or detectability. We fit Poisson N-mixture models to these data, quantified the bias associated with each combination, and evaluated if the parametric bootstrap goodness-of-fit (GOF) test can be used to indicate bias in parameter estimates. We also explored if assumption violations can be diagnosed prior to fitting N-mixture models. In doing so, we propose a new model diagnostic, which we term the quasi-coefficient of variation (QCV). N-mixture models performed well when assumptions were met and detection probabilities were moderate (i.e., ≥0.3), and the performance of the estimator improved with increasing survey occasions and sample units. However, the magnitude of bias in estimated mean abundance with even slight amounts of unmodeled heterogeneity was substantial. The parametric bootstrap GOF test did not perform well as a diagnostic for bias in parameter estimates when detectability and sample sizes were low. The results indicate the QCV is useful to diagnose potential bias and that potential bias associated with unidirectional trends in abundance or detectability can be diagnosed using Poisson regression. This study represents the most thorough assessment to date of assumption violations and diagnostics when fitting N-mixture models using the most commonly implemented error distribution. Unbiased estimates of population state variables are needed to properly inform management decision making. Therefore, we also discuss alternative approaches to yield unbiased estimates of population state variables using similar data types, and we stress that there is no substitute for an effective sample design that is grounded upon well-defined management objectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Duarte, Adam & Adams, Michael J. & Peterson, James T., 2018. "Fitting N-mixture models to count data with unmodeled heterogeneity: Bias, diagnostics, and alternative approaches," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 374(C), pages 51-59.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:374:y:2018:i:c:p:51-59
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.02.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380018300607
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.02.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. D. Dail & L. Madsen, 2011. "Models for Estimating Abundance from Repeated Counts of an Open Metapopulation," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(2), pages 577-587, June.
    2. Bates, Douglas & Mächler, Martin & Bolker, Ben & Walker, Steve, 2015. "Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 67(i01).
    3. J. Andrew Royle, 2004. "N-Mixture Models for Estimating Population Size from Spatially Replicated Counts," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 108-115, March.
    4. Fiske, Ian & Chandler, Richard, 2011. "unmarked: An R Package for Fitting Hierarchical Models of Wildlife Occurrence and Abundance," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 43(i10).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Whitlock, Steven L. & Womble, Jamie N. & Peterson, James T., 2020. "Modelling pinniped abundance and distribution by combining counts at terrestrial sites and in-water sightings," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 420(C).
    2. Adam Martin-Schwarze & Jarad Niemi & Philip Dixon, 2021. "Joint Modeling of Distances and Times in Point-Count Surveys," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 26(2), pages 289-305, June.
    3. Beth E Ross & Daniel S Sullins & David A Haukos, 2019. "Using an individual-based model to assess common biases in lek-based count data to estimate population trajectories of lesser prairie-chickens," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Steen, Valerie A. & Duarte, Adam & Peterson, James T., 2023. "An evaluation of multistate occupancy models for estimating relative abundance and population trends," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 478(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthew R. P. Parker & Laura L. E. Cowen & Jiguo Cao & Lloyd T. Elliott, 2023. "Computational Efficiency and Precision for Replicated-Count and Batch-Marked Hidden Population Models," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 28(1), pages 43-58, March.
    2. Perry J. Williams & Cody Schroeder & Pat Jackson, 2020. "Estimating Reproduction and Survival of Unmarked Juveniles Using Aerial Images and Marked Adults," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 25(2), pages 133-147, June.
    3. Whitlock, Steven L. & Womble, Jamie N. & Peterson, James T., 2020. "Modelling pinniped abundance and distribution by combining counts at terrestrial sites and in-water sightings," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 420(C).
    4. Xiaoli Fan & Miguel I. Gómez & Shady S. Atallah & Jon M. Conrad, 2020. "A Bayesian State‐Space Approach for Invasive Species Management: The Case of Spotted Wing Drosophila," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(4), pages 1227-1244, August.
    5. Emily B. Dennis & Byron J.T. Morgan & Martin S. Ridout, 2015. "Computational aspects of N-mixture models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 237-246, March.
    6. Kowalewski, Lucas K. & Chizinski, Christopher J. & Powell, Larkin A. & Pope, Kevin L. & Pegg, Mark A., 2015. "Accuracy or precision: Implications of sample design and methodology on abundance estimation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 316(C), pages 185-190.
    7. Rafael A. Moral & John Hinde & Clarice G. B. Demétrio & Carolina Reigada & Wesley A. C. Godoy, 2018. "Models for Jointly Estimating Abundances of Two Unmarked Site-Associated Species Subject to Imperfect Detection," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 23(1), pages 20-38, March.
    8. JANSSENS, Jochen & DE CORTE, Annelies & SÖRENSEN, Kenneth, 2016. "Water distribution network design optimisation with respect to reliability," Working Papers 2016007, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    9. Raymond Hernandez & Elizabeth A. Pyatak & Cheryl L. P. Vigen & Haomiao Jin & Stefan Schneider & Donna Spruijt-Metz & Shawn C. Roll, 2021. "Understanding Worker Well-Being Relative to High-Workload and Recovery Activities across a Whole Day: Pilot Testing an Ecological Momentary Assessment Technique," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-17, October.
    10. Christopher Hassall & Michael Nisbet & Evan Norcliffe & He Wang, 2024. "The Potential Health Benefits of Urban Tree Planting Suggested through Immersive Environments," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-12, February.
    11. Jie Zhao & Ji Chen & Damien Beillouin & Hans Lambers & Yadong Yang & Pete Smith & Zhaohai Zeng & Jørgen E. Olesen & Huadong Zang, 2022. "Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    12. Elisabeth Beckmann & Lukas Olbrich & Joseph Sakshaug, 2024. "Multivariate assessment of interviewer-related errors in a cross-national economic survey (Lukas Olbrich, Elisabeth Beckmann, Joseph W. Sakshaug)," Working Papers 253, Oesterreichische Nationalbank (Austrian Central Bank).
    13. Linda M. Haines, 2016. "A Note on the Royle–Nichols Model for Repeated Detection–Nondetection Data," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 21(3), pages 588-598, September.
    14. F J Heather & D Z Childs & A M Darnaude & J L Blanchard, 2018. "Using an integral projection model to assess the effect of temperature on the growth of gilthead seabream Sparus aurata," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, May.
    15. Valentina Krenz & Arjen Alink & Tobias Sommer & Benno Roozendaal & Lars Schwabe, 2023. "Time-dependent memory transformation in hippocampus and neocortex is semantic in nature," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    16. Morán-Ordóñez, Alejandra & Ameztegui, Aitor & De Cáceres, Miquel & de-Miguel, Sergio & Lefèvre, François & Brotons, Lluís & Coll, Lluís, 2020. "Future trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services in Mediterranean forests under global change scenarios," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    17. Jack McDonnell & Thomas McKenna & Kathryn A. Yurkonis & Deirdre Hennessy & Rafael Andrade Moral & Caroline Brophy, 2023. "A Mixed Model for Assessing the Effect of Numerous Plant Species Interactions on Grassland Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function Relationships," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 28(1), pages 1-19, March.
    18. Ana Pinto & Tong Yin & Marion Reichenbach & Raghavendra Bhatta & Pradeep Kumar Malik & Eva Schlecht & Sven König, 2020. "Enteric Methane Emissions of Dairy Cattle Considering Breed Composition, Pasture Management, Housing Conditions and Feeding Characteristics along a Rural-Urban Gradient in a Rising Megacity," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    19. Damian M. Herz & Manuel Bange & Gabriel Gonzalez-Escamilla & Miriam Auer & Keyoumars Ashkan & Petra Fischer & Huiling Tan & Rafal Bogacz & Muthuraman Muthuraman & Sergiu Groppa & Peter Brown, 2022. "Dynamic control of decision and movement speed in the human basal ganglia," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    20. Kathrin Stenchly & Marc Victor Hansen & Katharina Stein & Andreas Buerkert & Wilhelm Loewenstein, 2018. "Income Vulnerability of West African Farming Households to Losses in Pollination Services: A Case Study from Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:374:y:2018:i:c:p:51-59. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.