UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

1 Accuracy of Mark-Recapture Method Parameters in Estimating the Population Size of

2 Rice Grains

3 Africano, Winnie Andrea D.1, Bernardo Paul Cedric S.D.1, Carreon, Kiana Dominique L.1,

4 Polanes, Stephanie Kyrha R.1,

5
1
6 Department of Biological Sciences, College of Science, University of Santo Tomas, Manila

8 ABSTRACT

9 Finding the best method to measure the estimated size of a population of organisms in

10 the field is important for ecologists to see and understand how different biological factors affect

11 the size of the population of different species. The Mark and Recapture technique are one of the

12 common method used by releasing the marked individuals back from its population and then, later

13 on, catch a small group and record all the marked ones. The study aims to see how accurate the

14 Mark and recapture technique and what are the possible sources that vary the population size.

15 Rice grains were used as the population model; its graphical interpretation shows the estimated

16 population for each sampling effort and marking effort. The result shows that only the sampling

17 effort of using two tablespoons did a good estimate of the true population. Generally, parameters

18 used greatly varies from one study to another since catchability is solely based on the biological

19 and environmental factors and the nature of the animal species.

20 Keywords: Marking Effort, Mark-recapture method, Population size, Sampling Effort

21

22

23

24

25
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

26 INTRODUCTION

27 The accuracy in measuring the population of a certain species can be considered as one

28 of the most challenging tasks for Ecologists. Based on a study by Manning & Goldberg (2010), it

29 is difficult to measure a species’ population size as it increases, and is needed to be monitored

30 on a long term scale. Several other factors also contribute to the richness and occurrence of

31 species in a certain area, which can also affect the increase or decrease of a certain species

32 being monitored for population estimation. Through the challenges and factors that may or may

33 not be advantageous for Ecologists, an estimate representing the total population may be inferred

34 through various methods of determining species population.

35 Performing different population estimation techniques is vital and is more accurate in

36 monitoring the current trend of a species’ lifespan as well as how diverse species in a certain area

37 may be. The techniques for estimation of the population may vary based on what the researcher

38 would want to focus, as more detailed identification also entails a more detailed and time-

39 consuming process of acquiring data for more specific and accurate estimation of a population.

40 However, not all population of species may be accounted for an estimated census as some

41 species are discreet and secretive that performing common population estimation technique is

42 not suitable and factors that may influence the accuracy of estimating the population should be

43 taken into consideration (Willson, Winne, & Todd, 2011).

44 Acquiring biased data may lead to inaccurate results and it should be avoided when

45 sampling, which is why acquiring replicates is vital when gathering data. According to Witmer

46 (2005), by considering practicality in obtaining data to project an estimate of the population,

47 determining the most suitable method that could meet the objectives, demand, and

48 implementation is needed. For diverse reasons that population estimation techniques and

49 methods are used, the most common objective is to specify the state of the diversity and health

50 of the species of a certain area and monitor changes within the population over time. Double-
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

51 checking the results and computing for percent error contribute to a more accurate and precise

52 data set to be used for the analysis, which is why it is best to keep track of possible errors that

53 might have been overlooked. In order to avoid biased and unreliable data, it is considered

54 important to prevent performing a method that may be inefficient (Engeman & Witmer, 2000).

55 Researchers and Biologists perform methods that do not impose harm to the population of

56 species being studied by making use of methods that have concepts that are considerably easier

57 to interpret, like how factors such as sampling size, nature of species, and habitat, could affect

58 the accuracy of population estimation.

59

60 METHODS

61 Data Gathering

62 In simulating the mark-recapture method, an empty ice cream container was used as the

63 pre-defined area in which the population will experiment. Two (2) cups of sand were placed in the

64 plastic container. Uncooked rice grains measured from a “shot” glass was then added and mixed

65 with the sand. The rice grains will serve as the population in the simulation. Prior to doing the

66 experiment, a sample of 100 rice grains were marked with markers in the following manner: 10

67 grains (orange); 20 grains (green); 30 grains (purple); and 40 grains (blue). This is the marking

68 phase. Marking a number of grains according to color is called the Marking Effort (ME). All the

69 marked grains were returned to the container. Using a tablespoon, a spoonful of sand, equivalent

70 to one (1) Sampling Effort (SE), was sieved using a kitchen strainer. All the marked grains were

71 counted based on their ME or color and the unmarked grains were counted. This is the recapturing

72 phase. The simulation had a total of three (3) experiments. The first experiment used a SE of one

73 (1) tablespoon (SE1), the second had a two (2) tablespoons (SE2), and the third had three (3)

74 tablespoons (SE3). The recapturing of grains in all experiments was repeated ten (10) times to

75 obtain replicates. After doing the experiments, the population of rice grains in the container was
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

76 counted.

77

78 Statistical Methods

79 For each of the SE experiments, the population for each replicate was estimated and was

80 averaged. Percent error was also calculated using the average estimates for each experiment

81 and the true population of rice grains. The population estimated and percent error for each ME in

82 all SE experiments and was also calculated. Microsoft Excel, Paleontological Statistics software

83 (PAST v3.25), and R studio (V1.2.5001) were the statistical software used for encoding and

84 statistically testing the gathered data. Chi-squared test for the difference was performed using R

85 studio to determine which among the SE and ME variations are the most appropriate in estimating

86 the true population.

87

88 RESULTS

89 Based on the graph, Figure 1 A shows the visual representation of the estimated rice grain

90 population for each SE. Figure 1 B displays the estimated rice grain for each ME. Sampling Effort

91 of two tablespoons (SE2) is the most appropriate having an estimation of 2671.58 with a

92 percentage error of -3.66%. Based on the chi-squared analysis, SE2 got a p-value of 0.7176,

93 meaning that the estimated value is not significantly different from the true population value of

94 rice grains which is 2773. Other SE and all ME parameters were excluded because their p-value

95 is less than 0.05 and is significantly different from the expected value.

96

97

98

99

100
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

101 A. B.
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119 Figure 1: A.) Estimated rice grain population for each Sampling Effort (SE); B.) Estimated rice grain for
120 each Marking Effort (ME); (TP = Total population)
121

122 DISCUSSION

123 Catchability depends on every sample (Marten, 1970). The total population is influenced

124 by biological and environmental factors. The population in any species fluctuates every time and

125 most of these changes if often associated with birth, mortality, emigration, and immigration

126 (Adams, 1951). Ideally, there can be a good estimate in the population when these factors happen

127 at a constant rate and when appropriate methods are used. However, most of these conditions

128 are not met when estimating the population of different kinds of animals (Seber & Le Cren, 1967).

129 Since the study is a simulation of the mark-recapture method in rice grains, biological and

130 environmental factors were eliminated and, no changes in the total population will occur. The

131 population is contained within a controlled environment and there is an equal probability that each

132 individual can be captured.

133 The SE and ME affect accuracy and precision on how the population can be estimated.

134 Generally, as the parameters increases, it decreases error and increases the chance of estimating

135 the population (Kordjazi et al., 2016). The ratio of recaptured samples is not always as equal as
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

136 the number of unmarked samples, thus requiring that marking effort should be increased together

137 with the SE, guaranteeing that the recapture sample includes at least one marked member

138 (Robson & Regier, 1964). However, too much increase in the parameters may overestimate the

139 total population, thus the parameters should more or less have an equal ratio for constant

140 catchability. Since all of the proposed marking efforts underestimated and overestimated the

141 population, the optimum number of marked grains should be more than 40 grains. A 100 grain

142 marking effort in 2 tablespoons of SE did yielded a good estimate and considered to be an

143 appropriate sampling and marking ratio.

144

145 CONCLUSION

146 The mark-recapture method proved to get good estimates in a true population of a species.

147 However, an optimum parameter greatly varies from one study to another since catchability is

148 solely based on the nature of the animal species being studied. Modification and adjustment are

149 essential for every type of animal needed to be studied, especially when data for the true

150 population is not available. This simulation is a good example of determining the optimum SE and

151 ME to get good estimates through the process of trial and error. To further make this simulation

152 more realistic, it is recommended that live samples should be studied to incorporate the biological

153 and ecological factors that affect the population.

154

155

156

157

158

159

160
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

161 REFERENCES

162 Journal Articles

163 Adams, L. (1951). Confidence Limits for the Petersen or Lincoln Index Used in Animal Population
164 Studies. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 15(1), 13. doi: 10.2307/3796764
165
166 Engeman, R., M., & Witmer, G., W. (2000). IPM strategies: Indexing difficult to monitor populations
167 of pest species. Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference, 19.
168 doi:10.5070/v419110013
169
170 Kordjazi, Z., Frusher, S., Buxton, C., Gardner, C., & Bird, T. (2016). The influence of mark-
171 recapture sampling effort on estimates of rock lobster survival. PLoS ONE, 11(3), 1–10.
172 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151683
173
174 Manning, J. A., & Goldberg, C. S. (2010). Estimating population size using capture-recapture
175 encounter histories created from point‐coordinate locations of animals. Methods in Ecology
176 and Evolution, 1(4), 389-397.
177
178 Marten, G. G. (2016). A Regression Method for Mark-Recapture Estimation of Population Size
179 with Unequal Catchability Author ( s ): Gerald G . Marten Published by : Wiley Stable URL :
180 http://www.jstor.org/stable/1933666 Accessed : 27-06-2016 02 : 45 UTC Your use of the
181 JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use , available at.
182 51(2), 291–295.

183 Robson, D. S., & Regier, H. A. (1964). Sample Size in Petersen Mark–Recapture
184 Experiments. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 93(3), 215–226. doi:
185 10.1577/1548-8659(1964)93[215:ssipme]2.0.co;2

186 Seber, G. A. F., & Cren, E. D. L. (1967). Estimating Population Parameters from Catches Large
187 Relative to the Population. The Journal of Animal Ecology, 36(3), 631. doi: 10.2307/2818
188
189 Willson, J. D., Winne, C. T., & Todd, B. D. (2011). Ecological and methodological factors affecting
190 detectability and population estimation in elusive species. The Journal of Wildlife
191 Management, 75(1), 36-45.
192
193 Witmer, G. W. (2005). Wildlife population monitoring: some practical considerations. Wildlife
194 Research, 32(3), 259.
195

196

197

198

199

200
UST College of Science Department of Biological Sciences

201 APPENDIX

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216 Figure 2: Total rice grains count arranged in hundreds

217