Comparing abundance, discrete region to "whole distribution"

Forum for discussion of general questions related to study design and/or analysis of existing data - software neutral.

Comparing abundance, discrete region to "whole distribution"

Postby jaas0991 » Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:34 am

Hello,

I'm having trouble comparing estimates of abundance calculated at a discrete region, to estimates obtained for the "whole population" of a whale.

I've obtained estimates using the closed model of Otis et al., and JS POPAN, in a particular region of the total distribution of a whale. According to genetic, acoustics and sighting data, the whale is resident to an inland sea, the Gulf of California, Mexico. We have a good idea about its distribution; it moves along both coasts of the gulf during the year. The region I've studied represents around 10% of the distribution, but we argue it's important for the species and visited by a significant fraction of the total population in the gulf each year.

My study is based on photo-identification data collected during 8 years. I'm trying to compare my estimates with others, also produced from photo-id data, but collected from multiple localities on the gulf (representing a bigger part of the distribution); and with distance sampling estimates (presumed to have covered the whole distribution of the whale, done with airplane surveys). The comments I'm getting from my committee are about the numbers; since my estimates in this discrete region are similar to estimates for the "whole population.

Help please, how would I compare these estimates? We know whales are not present here all year, but I'm interpreting my estimates as being representative of the "whole population" since that is what makes the most sense to me.

Thanks,
Joel Arredondo
jaas0991
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:50 pm
Location: Ensenada. Mexico. [CICESE]

Return to analysis & design questions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests