Evaluating capture–recapture population and density estimation of tigers in a population with known parameters

99 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.

Monitoring in the presence of species misidentification: the case of the Eurasian lynx in the Alps (2012, background): “However, they are mainly used in smaller study areas in the range of 100–1000 km2 (e.g. Treves et al., 2010, but see Sharma et al., 2010 and Sollmann et al., 2011 for exceptions).”
Estimating jaguar densities with camera traps: Problems with current designs and recommendations for future studies (2013, methodology): “This has been realized when researchers compared the MMDM obtained from camera traps to the MMDM from telemetry data, and lead to the suggestion that the full MMDM might be a more representative buffer than ½ MMDM (Dillon and Kelly, 2008; Sharma et al., 2010; Soisalo and Cavalcanti, 2006).”
Density of tiger and leopard in a tropical deciduous forest of Mudumalai Tiger Reserve, southern India, as estimated using photographic capture–recapture sampling (2011, methodology): “In India, this method has also been used for estimating tiger densities in a number of protected areas (Sharma et al. 2010; Jhala et al. 2008; Karanth 1995; Karanth and Nichols 1998, 2000, 2002; Karanth et al. 2004, 2006).”