Skip to Main Content
Sampling scales define occupancy and underlying occupancy-abundance relationships in animalsAuthor(s): Robin Steenweg; Mark Hebblewhite; Jesse Whittington; Paul Lukacs; Kevin McKelvey
Source: Ecology. 99(1): 172-183.
Publication Series: Scientific Journal (JRNL)
Station: Rocky Mountain Research Station
Download Publication (1.0 MB)
DescriptionOccupancy-abundance (OA) relationships are a foundational ecological phenomenon and field of study, and occupancy models are increasingly used to track population trends and understand ecological interactions. However, these two fields of ecological inquiry remain largely isolated, despite growing appreciation of the importance of integration. For example, using occupancy models to infer trends in abundance is predicated on positive OA relationships. Many occupancy studies collect data that violate geographical closure assumptions due to the choice of sampling scales and application to mobile organisms, which may change how occupancy and abundance are related. Little research, however, has explored how different occupancy sampling designs affect OA relationships. We develop a conceptual framework for understanding how sampling scales affect the definition of occupancy for mobile organisms, which drives OA relationships. We explore how spatial and temporal sampling scales, and the choice of sampling unit (areal vs. point sampling), affect OA relationships. We develop predictions using simulations, and test them using empirical occupancy data from remote cameras on 11 medium-large mammals. Surprisingly, our simulations demonstrate that when using point sampling, OA relationships are unaffected by spatial sampling grain (i.e., cell size). In contrast, when using areal sampling (e.g., species atlas data), OA relationships are affected by spatial grain. Furthermore, OA relationships are also affected by temporal sampling scales, where the curvature of the OA relationship increases with temporal sampling duration. Our empirical results support these predictions, showing that at any given abundance, the spatial grain of point sampling does not affect occupancy estimates, but longer surveys do increase occupancy estimates. For rare species (low occupancy), estimates of occupancy will quickly increase with longer surveys, even while abundance remains constant. Our results also clearly demonstrate that occupancy for mobile species without geographical closure is not true occupancy. The independence of occupancy estimates from spatial sampling grain depends on the sampling unit. Point-sampling surveys can, however, provide unbiased estimates of occupancy for multiple species simultaneously, irrespective of home-range size. The use of occupancy for trend monitoring needs to explicitly articulate how the chosen sampling scales define occupancy and affect the occupancy-abundance relationship.
- You may send email to firstname.lastname@example.org to request a hard copy of this publication.
- (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
- We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
- This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.
CitationSteenweg, Robin; Hebblewhite, Mark; Whittington, Jesse; Lukacs, Paul; McKelvey, Kevin. 2018. Sampling scales define occupancy and underlying occupancy-abundance relationships in animals. Ecology. 99(1): 172-183.
Keywordsabundance-occupancy, distribution-abundance, large mammals, mobile organisms, occupancy models, sampling, scale
- Simulations inform design of regional occupancy-based monitoring for a sparsely distributed, territorial species
- Species-specific differences in detection and occupancy probabilities help drive ability to detect trends in occupancy
- Efficient species-level monitoring at the landscape scale
XML: View XML