Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPhoebus, Isobel
dc.contributor.authorBoulanger, John
dc.contributor.authorEiken, Hans Geir
dc.contributor.authorFløystad, Ida
dc.contributor.authorGraham, Karen
dc.contributor.authorHagen, Snorre
dc.contributor.authorSorensen, Anja
dc.contributor.authorStenhouse, Gordon
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-04T18:33:17Z
dc.date.available2021-02-04T18:33:17Z
dc.date.created2020-09-25T21:40:56Z
dc.date.issued2020-09-16
dc.identifier.citationWildlife Biology. 2020, 2020 (3), .en_US
dc.identifier.issn0909-6396
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2726285
dc.description.abstractWildlife managers conduct population inventories to monitor species, particularly those at-risk. Although costly and time consuming, grid-based DNA hair-snag sampling has been the standard protocol for grizzly bear inventories in North America, while opportunistic fecal DNA sampling is more commonly used in Europe. Our aim is to determine if low-cost, low-effort scat sampling along roads can replace the current standard. We compare two genetic non-invasive techniques using concurrent sampling within the same grid system and spatially explicit capture–recapture. We found that given our methodology and the present status of fecal genotyping for grizzly bears, scat sampling along roads cannot replace hair sampling to estimate population size in low-density areas. Hair sampling identified the majority of individual grizzly bears, with a higher success rate of individuals identified from grizzly bear samples (100%) compared to scat sampling (14%). Using scat DNA to supplement hair data did not change population estimates, but it did improve estimate precision. Scat samples had higher success identifying species (98%) compared with hair (80%). Scat sampling detected grizzly bears in grid cells where hair sampling showed non-detection, with almost twice the number of cells indicating grizzly bear presence. Based on our methods and projected expenses for future implementation, we estimated an approximate 30% cost reduction for sampling scat relative to hair. Our research explores the application of genetic non-invasive approaches to monitor bear populations. We recommend wildlife managers continue to use hair-snag sampling as the primary method for DNA inventories, while employing scat sampling as supplemental to increase estimate precision. Scat sampling may better indicate presence of bear species through greater numbers and spatial distribution of detections, if sampling is systematic across the entire area of interest. Our findings speak to the management of other species and regions, and contribute to ongoing advances of monitoring wildlife populations.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherBioOneen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleComparison of grizzly bear hair-snag and scat sampling along roads to inform wildlife population monitoringen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holder© 2020 The Authorsen_US
dc.source.pagenumber12en_US
dc.source.volume2020en_US
dc.source.journalWildlife Biologyen_US
dc.source.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2981/wlb.00697
dc.identifier.cristin1833706
dc.source.articlenumberwlb.00697en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal