RESUMEN
A vast amount of ecological knowledge generated over the past two decades has hinged upon the ability of model selection methods to discriminate among various ecological hypotheses. The last decade has seen the rise of Bayesian hierarchical models in ecology. Consequently, commonly used tools, such as the AIC, become largely inapplicable and there appears to be no consensus about a particular model selection tool that can be universally applied. We focus on a specific class of competing Bayesian spatial capture-recapture (SCR) models and apply and evaluate some of the recommended Bayesian model selection tools: (1) Bayes Factor-using (a) Gelfand-Dey and (b) harmonic mean methods, (2) Deviance Information Criterion (DIC), (3) Watanabe-Akaike's Information Criterion (WAIC) and (4) posterior predictive loss criterion. In all, we evaluate 25 variants of model selection tools in our study. We evaluate these model selection tools from the standpoint of selecting the "true" model and parameter estimation. In all, we generate 120 simulated data sets using the true model and assess the frequency with which the true model is selected and how well the tool estimates N (population size), a parameter of much importance to ecologists. We find that when information content is low in the data, no particular model selection tool can be recommended to help realize, simultaneously, both the goals of model selection and parameter estimation. But, in general (when we consider both the objectives together), we recommend the use of our application of the Bayes Factor (Gelfand-Dey with MAP approximation) for Bayesian SCR models. Our study highlights the point that although new model selection tools are emerging (e.g., WAIC) in the applied statistics literature, those tools based on sound theory even under approximation may still perform much better.
RESUMEN
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.