Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Testing Demographic Methods Using Field Studies of Five Dissimilar Species

2021; Ecological Society of America; Volume: 102; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/bes2.1870

2327-6096

Daniel F. Doak, Marı́a B. Garcı́a, Cristina Linares, Sarah W. Fitzpatrick, W. Chris Funk, Megan L. DeMarche, Ellen Waddle, Robert K. Shriver, William F. Morris,

Marine and fisheries research

We analyzed how the choice of different modeling frameworks influences the results of demographic analyses, with the goal of assessing how robust population predictions are to different methods and assumptions. Our simulation tests use data we have collected during field studies of five different species that span a wide range of life histories, habitats, and taxonomic groups. We found that some modeling decisions thought to be important are not particularly influential on results, while others are. Most broadly we found that integral projection models (IPMs) and matrix models are not clearly separate in their structure or predictions. Photo 1. Habitats of the focal species and populations used in this study. (A) Niwot Ridge, Colorado, United States, site of data collection for Polygonum viviparum, the alpine bistort. (B) Noguera Ribagorzana Valley, Spain, the study site and the only natural population of Borderea chouardii. (C) Boreal forest in the Wrangell Mountains of Alaska, United States, site of the Vulpicida pinastri study. (D) Montgrí, Illes Medes, and Baix Ter Marine Natural Park in the Spanish Mediterranean sea, one of three locations of our fieldwork on Paramuricea clavata, the Mediterranean red gorgonian. (E) The Marianne River, Trinidad, one of the sites for data collection on Poecilia reticulata, the guppy. Photo credits: Daniel F. Doak (A, C), María Begoña García (B), Cristina Linares (D), and Sarah W. Fitzpatrick (E). Photo 2. Portraits of each study species. (A) Polygonum viviparum. (B) Borderea chouardii. (C) Vulpicida pinastri. (D) Paramuricea clavata. (E) Poecilia reticulata. Photo credits: Ellen Waddle (A) María Begoña García (B), Daniel F. Doak (C), Cristina Linares (D), and David Herasimtschuk (E). Photo 3. Examples of field methods used in each demographic study. (A) Individual Polygonum viviparum are marked using multi-colored party toothpicks. (B) Many Borderea chouardii exist on high cliffs and must be censused and measured using scaffolding and ladders. (C) Each Vulpicida pinastri thallus is marked with a tree tag stapled below it on an alder stem. (D) Paramuricea clavata colonies are relocated and measured by research divers who must be careful to not damage the colonies as they work. (E) Poecilia reticulata are relocated by intensive capture efforts in each stream section. Photo credits: Daniel F. Doak (A, C), Ramon Antor (B), Cristina Linares (D), and Courtney L. Fitzpatrick (E). These photographs illustrate the article “A critical comparison of integral projection and matrix projection models for demographic analysis” by Daniel F Doak; Ellen Waddle; Ryan E. Langendorf; Allison M. Louthan; Nathalie Isabelle Chardon; Reilly R. Dibner; Douglas A. Keinath; Elizabeth Lombardi; Christopher Steenbock; Robert K. Shriver; Cristina Linares; Maria Begoña Garcia; W. Chris Funk; Sarah W. Fitzpatrick; William F. Morris; and Megan L. Peterson published in Ecological Monographs. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1447