SOURCES OF HETEROGENEITY BIAS WHEN DNA MARK-RECAPTURE SAMPLING METHODS ARE APPLIED TO GRIZZLY BEAR (URSUS ARCTOS) POPULATIONS

84 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Ecological investigations of grizzly bears in Canada using DNA from hair, 1995–2005: a review of methods and progress (2010, methodology): “For instance, when bears concentrated along salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) streams, we placed sampling stations linearly along stream banks (Boulanger et al. 2004a).”
Dynamic wildlife habitat models: Seasonal foods and mortality risk predict occupancy-abundance and habitat selection in grizzly bears (2010, methodology): “…was examined at four possible scales: (1) 300-m radius or 10 times the original map grain; (2) 1.69-km radius or detection scale of hair-snag sites (Boulanger et al., 2004); (3) 3.95-km radius or the scale of the DNA sampling grid used for locating ‘re-capture’ sites; and (4) 10-km radius or…”
Some mechanisms underlying variation in vital rates of grizzly bears on a multiple use landscape (2015, background): “Bears on the BC side of the Canada–United States border likely had reduced detection rates at baited hair-traps because they had been captured using foot snares for 2 decades and were likely wary of bait, human-scent, and wire (Boulanger et al. 2004).”
Estimation of census and effective population sizes: the increasing usefulness of DNA-based approaches (2010, unknown): “Boulanger et al. (2004) conducted simulations that suggested capture probabilities of 0.20 and population sizes of *50 were needed to generate reliable results for estimating brown bear (Ursus arctos) NC from DNA sampling.”