Expanding the feasibility of fish and wildlife assessments with close‐kin mark–recapture

Abstract Close‐kin mark–recapture (CKMR) is a powerful new method for the assessment of fish and wildlife population dynamics. Unlike traditional mark–recapture techniques, the use of kinship as an identifying mark is robust to many forms of capture heterogeneity including variation in gear efficien...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Benjamin Marcy‐Quay, Suresh A. Sethi, Nina O. Therkildsen, Clifford E. Kraft
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2020-10-01
Series:Ecosphere
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.3259
_version_ 1819029107159072768
author Benjamin Marcy‐Quay
Suresh A. Sethi
Nina O. Therkildsen
Clifford E. Kraft
author_facet Benjamin Marcy‐Quay
Suresh A. Sethi
Nina O. Therkildsen
Clifford E. Kraft
author_sort Benjamin Marcy‐Quay
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Close‐kin mark–recapture (CKMR) is a powerful new method for the assessment of fish and wildlife population dynamics. Unlike traditional mark–recapture techniques, the use of kinship as an identifying mark is robust to many forms of capture heterogeneity including variation in gear efficiency and tagging‐based effects such as loss and differential mortality. In addition, close‐kin methods can be applied to a wider range of sampling designs than traditional methods (e.g., single‐occasion surveys and lethal capture), can provide retrospective historical abundance estimates, and can produce survival estimates from as few as two sampling occasions. We evaluated the ability of CKMR to provide estimates of abundance and adult survival and then compared results to those from traditional mark–recapture. This analysis incorporated data from a three‐year study of lake resident brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) where individuals were both physically (PIT) tagged and genotyped for 44 de novo developed microsatellites with high throughput sequencing. Traditional mark–recapture estimates were derived using Pollock’s Robust Design, relying upon three primary open sampling occasions and four secondary closed occasions. We found that close‐kin methods produced contemporary estimates of adult abundance and survival that were similar to those produced by traditional mark–recapture in both magnitude and precision. Furthermore, CKMR provided abundance estimates for multiple years prior to sampling and, when restricted to data from a single year, still produced reliable abundance estimates for at least one and as many as three years. Retrospective abundance estimates corresponded with those from a separate historical two‐sample mark–recapture dataset. This study provides support for the use of CKMR as a robust and sampling‐efficient alternative to traditional mark–recapture methods of assessing population parameters.
first_indexed 2024-12-21T06:09:00Z
format Article
id doaj.art-46a5bbf438314ca5a57d5c6b0f868262
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2150-8925
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-21T06:09:00Z
publishDate 2020-10-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Ecosphere
spelling doaj.art-46a5bbf438314ca5a57d5c6b0f8682622022-12-21T19:13:34ZengWileyEcosphere2150-89252020-10-011110n/an/a10.1002/ecs2.3259Expanding the feasibility of fish and wildlife assessments with close‐kin mark–recaptureBenjamin Marcy‐Quay0Suresh A. Sethi1Nina O. Therkildsen2Clifford E. Kraft3Department of Natural Resources Cornell University Ithaca New York14853USAU.S. Geological Survey New York Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Cornell University Ithaca New York14853USADepartment of Natural Resources Cornell University Ithaca New York14853USADepartment of Natural Resources Cornell University Ithaca New York14853USAAbstract Close‐kin mark–recapture (CKMR) is a powerful new method for the assessment of fish and wildlife population dynamics. Unlike traditional mark–recapture techniques, the use of kinship as an identifying mark is robust to many forms of capture heterogeneity including variation in gear efficiency and tagging‐based effects such as loss and differential mortality. In addition, close‐kin methods can be applied to a wider range of sampling designs than traditional methods (e.g., single‐occasion surveys and lethal capture), can provide retrospective historical abundance estimates, and can produce survival estimates from as few as two sampling occasions. We evaluated the ability of CKMR to provide estimates of abundance and adult survival and then compared results to those from traditional mark–recapture. This analysis incorporated data from a three‐year study of lake resident brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) where individuals were both physically (PIT) tagged and genotyped for 44 de novo developed microsatellites with high throughput sequencing. Traditional mark–recapture estimates were derived using Pollock’s Robust Design, relying upon three primary open sampling occasions and four secondary closed occasions. We found that close‐kin methods produced contemporary estimates of adult abundance and survival that were similar to those produced by traditional mark–recapture in both magnitude and precision. Furthermore, CKMR provided abundance estimates for multiple years prior to sampling and, when restricted to data from a single year, still produced reliable abundance estimates for at least one and as many as three years. Retrospective abundance estimates corresponded with those from a separate historical two‐sample mark–recapture dataset. This study provides support for the use of CKMR as a robust and sampling‐efficient alternative to traditional mark–recapture methods of assessing population parameters.https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.3259close‐kin mark–recapturefishgeneticpopulation dynamicsrobust designamplicon sequencing
spellingShingle Benjamin Marcy‐Quay
Suresh A. Sethi
Nina O. Therkildsen
Clifford E. Kraft
Expanding the feasibility of fish and wildlife assessments with close‐kin mark–recapture
Ecosphere
close‐kin mark–recapture
fish
genetic
population dynamics
robust design
amplicon sequencing
title Expanding the feasibility of fish and wildlife assessments with close‐kin mark–recapture
title_full Expanding the feasibility of fish and wildlife assessments with close‐kin mark–recapture
title_fullStr Expanding the feasibility of fish and wildlife assessments with close‐kin mark–recapture
title_full_unstemmed Expanding the feasibility of fish and wildlife assessments with close‐kin mark–recapture
title_short Expanding the feasibility of fish and wildlife assessments with close‐kin mark–recapture
title_sort expanding the feasibility of fish and wildlife assessments with close kin mark recapture
topic close‐kin mark–recapture
fish
genetic
population dynamics
robust design
amplicon sequencing
url https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.3259
work_keys_str_mv AT benjaminmarcyquay expandingthefeasibilityoffishandwildlifeassessmentswithclosekinmarkrecapture
AT sureshasethi expandingthefeasibilityoffishandwildlifeassessmentswithclosekinmarkrecapture
AT ninaotherkildsen expandingthefeasibilityoffishandwildlifeassessmentswithclosekinmarkrecapture
AT cliffordekraft expandingthefeasibilityoffishandwildlifeassessmentswithclosekinmarkrecapture