Using camera traps and N‐mixture models to estimate population abundance: Model selection really matters

Abstract

Abstract Estimating the abundance or density of wildlife populations is a critical part of species conservation and management, but estimates can vary greatly in precision and accuracy according to the sampling and statistical methods, sampling and ecological variation, and sample size. We used images of moose (Alces americanus) from camera traps to parameterize N‐mixture models and tested the effect of ecological conditions, the spatial scale of measurement, and the criteria used to define independent detections on estimates of population abundance. We compared the model estimates to those generated empirically with aerial survey data, the standard method for many species of ungulate. We explored the sensitivity of estimates to model choice based on the common statistical criterion of parsimony. The two most parsimonious N‐mixture models (i.e. AICc) were considerably biased, producing implausibly large and considerably imprecise estimates of abundance. Most of the other models produced estimates of moose abundance that were ecologically realistic and relatively accurate. The accuracy of population estimates produced by N‐mixture models was not overly sensitive to the formulation of models, the scale at which ecological conditions were measured, or the criteria used to define independent detection and by extension sample size. Our results suggested that parsimony was a poor measure of the predictive accuracy of the population estimates produced with the N‐mixture model. We recommend using a suite of models to generate predictions of abundance instead of the single top‐ranked model. Collecting and processing data from the aerial survey was less expensive and took less time, but data from camera traps provided a broader set of insights into the behaviour of moose and the co‐occurrence of competitors and predators.

Keywords

• camera traps
• model selection
• N‐mixture models
• parsimony
• population abundance
• probability of detection