This book is the second of two volumes in a series on terrestrial and marine comparisons, focusing on the temporal complement of the earlier spatial analysis of patchiness and pattern (Levin et al. 1993). The issue of the relationships among pattern, scale, and patchiness has been framed forcefully in John Steele’s writings of two decades (e.g., Steele 1978). There is no pattern without an observational frame. In the words of Nietzsche, “There are no facts… only interpretations.”

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2307/1941447

The Problem of Pattern and Scale in Ecology: The Robert H. MacArthur Award Lecture

The understanding of the dynamics of animal populations and of related ecological and evolutionary issues frequently depends on a direct analysis of life history parameters. For instance, examination of trade-offs between reproduction and survival usually rely on individually marked animals, for which the exact time of death is most often unknown, because marked individuals cannot be followed closely through time. Thus, the quantitative analysis of survival studies and experiments must be based on capture- recapture (or resighting) models which consider, besides the parameters of primary interest, recapture or resighting rates that are nuisance parameters. Capture-recapture models oriented to estimation of survival rates are the result of a recent change in emphasis from earlier approaches in which population size was the most important parameter, survival rates having been first introduced as nuisance parameters. This emphasis on survival rates in capture-recapture models developed rapidly in the 1980s and used as a basic structure the Cormack-Jolly-Seber survival model applied to an homogeneous group of animals, with various kinds of constraints on the model parameters. These approaches are conditional on first captures; hence they do not attempt to model the initial capture of unmarked animals as functions of population abundance in addition to survival and capture probabilities. This paper synthesizes, using a common framework, these recent developments together with new ones, with an emphasis on flexibility in modeling, model selection, and the analysis of multiple data sets. The effects on survival and capture rates of time, age, and categorical variables characterizing the individuals (e.g., sex) can be considered, as well as interactions between such effects. This "analysis of variance" philosophy emphasizes the structure of the survival and capture process rather than the technical characteristics of any particular model. The flexible array of models encompassed in this synthesis uses a common notation. As a result of the great level of flexibility and relevance achieved, the focus is changed from fitting a particular model to model building and model selection. The following procedure is recommended: (1) start from a global model compatible with the biology of the species studied and with the design of the study, and assess its fit; (2) select a more parsimonious model using Akaike's Information Criterion to limit the number of formal tests; (3) test for the most important biological questions by comparing this model with neighboring ones using likelihood ratio tests; and (4) obtain maximum likelihood estimates of model parameters with estimates of precision. Computer software is critical, as few of the models now available have parameter estimators that are in closed form. A comprehensive table of existing computer software is provided. We used RELEASE for data summary and goodness-of-fit tests and SURGE for iterative model fitting and the computation of likelihood ratio tests. Five increasingly complex examples are given to illustrate the theory. The first, using two data sets on the European Dipper (Cinclus cinclus), tests for sex-specific parameters,

https://ag.arizona.edu/classes/wfsc578/Lebreton%20et%20al.%201992.%20Modeling%20Survival%20and%20Testing%20Biological%20Hypotheses%20Using%20Marked%20Animals.pdf

Modeling Survival and Testing Biological Hypotheses Using Marked Animals: A Unified Approach with Case Studies

Modeling Survival and Testing Biological Hypotheses Using Marked Animals: A Unified

The coevolution of parasites and their hosts has both general biological interest and practical implications in agricultural, veterinary and medical fields Surprisingly, most medical, parasitological and ecological texts dismiss the subject with unsupported statements to the effect that ‘successful’ parasite species evolve to be harmless to their hosts Recently, however, several people have explored theoretical aspects of the population genetics of host-parasite associations; these authors conclude that such associations may be responsible for much of the genetic diversity found within natural populations, from blood group polymorphisms (Haldane, 1949) to protein polymorphisms in general (Clarke, 1975, 1976) and to histocompatibility systems (Duncan, Wakeland & Klein, 1980) It has also been argued that pathogens may constitute the selective force responsible for the evolution and maintenance of sexual reproduction in animal and plant species (Jaenike, 1978; Hamilton, 1980, 1981, 1982; Bremermann, 1980)

Coevolution of hosts and parasites.

At the basis of many capture-recapture sampling models is the assumption that all animals are equally likely to be caught in each sample (The Equal Catchability Assumption). This assumption is often violated in wildlife populations (Seber 1973:81) and 2 general types of alternatives exist (Pollock 1981): (1) Heterogeneity: The probability of capture in any sample is a property of the animal and may vary over the population. That is, animals may vary in capture probabilities according to age, sex, social status, and many other factors. (2) Trap response: The probability of capture in any sample depends on the animal's prior history of capture. That is, animals may become "trap shy" or "trap happy" depending upon the type of trapping method used. Either 1 or both of these 2 types of alternatives may be acting in a particular animal population. The traditional capture-recapture model used by biologists for closed populations (populations closed to additions or deletions) in short-term studies is the Schnabel Model (Schnabel 1938) that requires The Equal Catchability Assumption. In recent years there has been substantial research on models for closed populations that allow heterogeneity and/or trap response of the capture probabilities. Otis et al. (1978) published an important monograph on these models that allows their routine use by biologists. The capture-recapture model becoming used by biologists for open populations in long-term studies is the Jolly-Seber Model (Seber 1973). This model requires The Equal Catchability Assumption and the complexity of open population models is likely to preclude general models that allow heterogeneity and/or trap response. During the preparation of a review of capture-recapture methods (Pollock 1981), I realized that statisticians have drawn a sharp distinction between closed and open population models that is perhaps rather artificial. Here I describe a design for long-term studies that is robust to heterogeneity and/or trap response. It allows an analysis that uses methodology from closed and open population models. There is a brief examination of its robustness properties using simulation and an example is given in detail to illustrate the methodology for biologists.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/3808568.pdf

A Capture-Recapture Design Robust to Unequal Probability of Capture

The Mathematical Theory of the Dynamics of Biological Populations

Demographic Patterns in Developed Societies.

The Mathematical theory of the dynamics of biological populations II : based on the proceedings of a conference on the mathematical theory of the dynamics of biological populations held in Oxford, 1st-3rd July, 1980

R. W. Hiorns

Papers

The Mathematical Theory of the Dynamics of Biological Populations

Demographic Patterns in Developed Societies.

The Mathematical theory of the dynamics of biological populations II : based on the proceedings of a conference on the mathematical theory of the dynamics of biological populations held in Oxford, 1st-3rd July, 1980

The Mathematical Theory of the Dynamics of Biological Populations II

The Mathematical Theory of the Dynamics of Biological Populations, II.