Submit a preprint

Direct submissions to PCI Ecology from bioRxiv.org are possible using the B2J service

699

Using informative priors to account for identifiability issues in occupancy models with identification errorsuse asterix (*) to get italics
Célian Monchy, Marie-Pierre Etienne, Olivier GimenezPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
2024
<p>&nbsp;Non-invasive monitoring techniques like camera traps, autonomous recording units and environmental DNA are increasingly used to collect data for understanding species distribution. These methods have prompted the development of statistical models to suit specific sampling designs and get reliable ecological inferences.</p> <p>Site occupancy models estimate species occurrence patterns, accounting for the possibility &nbsp;that the target species may be present but unobserved. Here, two key processes are crucial: detection, when a species leaves signs of its presence, and identification where these signs are accurately recognized. While both processes are prone to error in general, wrong identifications are often considered as negligible with in situ observations. When applied to passive bio-monitoring data, characterized by datasets requiring automated processing, this second source of error can no longer be ignored as misclassifications at both steps can lead to significant biases in ecological estimates. Several model extensions have been proposed to address these potential errors.</p> <p>We propose an extended occupancy model that accounts for the identification process in addition to detection. Similar to other recent attempts to account for false positives, our model may suffer from &nbsp;identifiability issues, which usually require another source of data with perfect identification to resolve them. As an alternative when such data are unavailable, we propose leveraging existing knowledge of &nbsp;the identification process within a Bayesian framework by incorporating this knowledge through an informative prior. Through simulations, we compare different prior choices that encode varying levels of information, ranging from cases where no prior knowledge is available, to instances with accurate metrics on the performance of the identification, and scenarios based on generally accepted assumptions. We demonstrate that, compared to using a default prior, integrating information about the identification process as a prior reduces bias in parameter estimates. Overall, our approach mitigates identifiability issues, reduces estimation bias, and minimizes data requirements.</p> <p>In conclusion, we provide a statistical method applicable to various monitoring designs, such as camera trap, bioacoustics, or eDNA surveys, alongside non-invasive sampling technologies, to produce ecological outcomes that inform conservation decisions.</p>
https://You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13712490You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Bayesian modelling, camera traps, environmental DNA, false-positive, identifiability, informative priors, misidentification, non-invasive sampling, species occupancy
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Statistical ecology
Nick Isaac suggested: Bob O'Hara, Nick Isaac suggested: Kwaku Adjei
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
No need for them to be recommenders of PCIEcology. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
2024-05-11 12:04:10
Damaris Zurell