New Zealand sea lion pupping rate

Similar documents
FINAL Preliminary Report for CSP Project New Zealand sea lion monitoring at the Auckland Islands 2017/18

ESTIMATING NEST SUCCESS: WHEN MAYFIELD WINS DOUGLAS H. JOHNSON AND TERRY L. SHAFFER

Agenda Item J.2.b Supplemental Public Presentation 2 September Agenda Item J.2 Public Comment Geoff Shester, Ph.D.

Pup 61 within seconds of being born in South Haven, 22 September 2012

Genetic parameters of number of piglets nursed

Development of the New Zealand strategy for local eradication of tuberculosis from wildlife and livestock

2017 Elephant Seal Breeding Season Update January 27, 2017

Suckler cow management. Dai Grove-White.

Litter Information. Sire Information. Breeder Information. Mail completed application & fees to: English Shepherd Club Registry 1904 Transit Trail

Dairy Industry Network Data Standards. Animal Life Data. Discussion Document

Rearing heifers to calve at 24 months

HerdMASTER 4 Tip Sheet CREATING ANIMALS AND SIRES

Discussion paper on New Zealand sea lion pup mortality: causes and mitigation

Monitoring marine debris ingestion in loggerhead sea turtle, Caretta caretta, from East Spain (Western Mediterranean) since 1995 to 2016

Body length and its genetic relationships with production and reproduction traits in pigs

Decreasing annual nest counts in a globally important loggerhead sea turtle population

Assessment of cryptic seabird mortality due to trawl warps and longlines Final Report: INT Johanna Pierre Yvan Richard Edward Abraham

Lynx Update May 25, 2009 INTRODUCTION

Bison Mortality Survey Dr John Berezowski Western College of Veterinary Medicine Saskatoon, SK Canada

4-H Dog Showmanship. Class: Junior Intermediate Senior. 4-Her s Name Dog s Name Breed Show Location Date Judge. Smiling Friendly Confident.

Endangered Birds. Visit for thousands of books and materials.

Pupils work out how many descendents one female cat could produce in 18 months.

Overview of some of the latest development and new achievement of rabbit science research in the E.U.

Pregnancy loss is all too common. It doesn t have to be.

Pikas. Pikas, who live in rocky mountaintops, are not known to move across non-rocky areas or to

An Analysis of the Effect of Females First on Cat and Dog Populations

Texel Sheep Society. Basco Interface Guide. Contents

National Lambing Density Project

Using a Spatially Explicit Crocodile Population Model to Predict Potential Impacts of Sea Level Rise and Everglades Restoration Alternatives

Beef Calving Statistics (01/07/ /06/2016)

Biocontainment. Within populations. The Sandhills Calving System. Actions to prevent the spread of infectious agents.

Lab 7: Experimenting with Life and Death

Larval thermal windows in native and hybrid Pseudoboletia progeny (Echinoidea) as potential drivers of the hybridization zone

Estimates of Genetic Parameters and Environmental Effects of Hunting Performance in Finnish Hounds 1

Consent for Post mortem

Canine perinatal mortality: A cohort study of 224 breeds

FLOCK CALENDAR OUTLINE. a. Be sure they are vigorous, healthy and in good breeding condition.

Open all 4 factors immigration, emigration, birth, death are involved Ex.

Coyotes in legend and culture

TECHNICAL NOTE: RABBIT MEAT PRODUCTION UNDER A SMALL SCALE PRODUCTION SYSTEM AS A SOURCE OF ANIMAL PROTEIN IN A RURAL AREA OF MEXICO.

Simple Herd Level BVDV Eradication for Dairy

Shoot, shovel and shut up: cryptic poaching slows restoration of a large

EMBRYO DIAGNOSIS AN IMPORTANT TOOL TO HELP THE HATCHERY MANAGER

More Than a Pet Level J Nonfiction

RELATIONSHIPS AMONG WEIGHTS AND CALVING PERFORMANCE OF HEIFERS IN A HERD OF UNSELECTED CATTLE

Animal Birth Control (Dog) Rules, 2001

1.4. Initial training shall include sufficient obedience training to ensure the canine will operate effectively based on mission requirements.

The Long-term Effect of Precipitation on the Breeding Success of Golden Eagles Aquila chrysaetos homeyeri in the Judean and Negev Deserts, Israel

MODEL STANDARDS FOR PET SHOP LICENCE CONDITIONS

Eliminate Pre-sterilization Litters by Spaying Before the First Estrus: Making the Case to your Veterinarian. Richard Speck, DVM

Robust breeds for organic pig production. Tove Serup National specialist

7. Flock book and computer registration and selection

Risk factors for clinical mastitis, ketosis, and pneumonia in dairy cattle on organic and small conventional farms in the United States

SRINAGAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

Racing Greyhound Population Trends In New Zealand

Details: What You as a Producer Need to Know About the New Scrapie Eradication Program

New French genetic evaluations of fertility and productive life of beef cows

How to use Mating Module Pedigree Master

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE COL- 01

Final Report. Nesting green turtles of Torres Strait. Mark Hamann, Justin Smith, Shane Preston and Mariana Fuentes

ADDENDUM 4 GOOD MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND SOP S FOR CATTLE FARMERS.

Eliminate Pre-sterilization Litters by Spaying Before the First Estrus: Making the Case to your Veterinarian. Richard Speck, DVM

Surveys of the Street and Private Dog Population: Kalhaar Bungalows, Gujarat India

Yonat Swimmer, Richard Brill, Lianne Mailloux University of Hawaii VIMS-NMFS

RULES OF THE TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DIVISION OF ANIMAL INDUSTRIES CHAPTER BRUCELLOSIS TESTING AND QUARANTINE REGULATIONS

Answers to Questions about Smarter Balanced 2017 Test Results. March 27, 2018

NATURAL HISTORY, DEMOGRAPHY, AND DISPERSAL BEHAVIOUR OF A CRITICALLY ENDANGERED ISLAND ENDEMIC, UTILA SPINY-TAILED IGUANA CTENOSAURA BAKERI

FOR RISK ASSESSMENT FEDERAL INSTITUTE. The raccoon dog as reservoir and vector for Trichinella in Germany?

Break Free from BVD. What is BVD? BVD outbreak in 2013/ cow dairy herd in Staffordshire. Costs Calculation Costs*

QUESTIONNAIRE: Vomiting and/or Diarrhea

Cow Exercise 1 Answer Key

Pierre-Louis Toutain, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire National veterinary School of Toulouse, France Wuhan 12/10/2015

Name: 4-H Club: Leader: Number of Years Showing Poultry:

Mobulid rays in the eastern Pacific

ABSTRACT. Ashmore Reef

Supplementary Fig. 1: Comparison of chase parameters for focal pack (a-f, n=1119) and for 4 dogs from 3 other packs (g-m, n=107).

TECHNICAL BULLETIN Claude Toudic Broiler Specialist June 2006

Management of bold wolves

Genetic parameters and breeding value stability estimated from a joint evaluation of purebred and crossbred sows for litter weight at weaning

by A.P. Ballance c/- 7 Florida Place, Auckland 5. ABSTRACT

Questions and Answers: Retail Pet Store Final Rule

The World According to Arp A children s book

GENETIC SELECTION FOR MILK QUALITY WHERE ARE WE? David Erf Dairy Technical Services Geneticist Zoetis

Use of Agent Based Modeling in an Ecological Conservation Context

Genetic approaches to improving lamb survival

University of Canberra. This thesis is available in print format from the University of Canberra Library.

A case study of harbour seals in the southern North Sea

LOW INPUT LAMBING & KIDDING:

The World According to Arp A children s book

AnOn. Behav., 1971, 19,

LOCAL TOLERANCE OF INTRAMAMMARY PREPARATIONS IN COWS

Original Draft: 11/4/97 Revised Draft: 6/21/12

Management traits. Teagasc, Moorepark, Ireland 2 ICBF

Establish Effective Animal Identification, Medication Records, and Withdrawal Time

INDEX. Regulations. Section 1 Membership Page 2. Section 2 Ownership Page 2

Lambs and landscapes. A.D. MACKAY 1, T.W. KNIGHT 1, J.P. KOOLAARD 1, G. SHEPPARD 2 and G. COLEMAN 3 1

Factors Affecting Calving Difficulty and the Influence of Pelvic Measurements on Calving Difficulty in Percentage Limousin Heifers

EVM analysis of an Interference Limited SIMO-SC System With Independent and Correlated Channels

FEATURES OF DISTRIBUTION OF LOADING IN COD-END OF TRAWL OF A VARIOUS DESIGN

Birds. Endangered Birds A Reading A Z Level M Leveled Book Word Count: 545 LEVELED BOOK M.

Transcription:

New Zealand sea lion pupping rate Project: POP2006 Dave Gilbert Louise Chilvers Presentation 19 September 2008 1

Goal: to estimate proportion of cows that breed as a function of age Definition of breeder Cow that gives birth, including when the pup dies or is stillborn Identification of breeders Codify behaviour comment field and use a criterion or fit a mixture of breeder and nonbreeder distributions to frequencies 2

3 Main behaviour frequencies 2129 351 473-13 29 2007 1974 278 299-11 22 2006 2063 191 127 2 1 35 2005 2510 617 509 1 34 31 2004 2186 612 393 3 34 3 2003 2121 344 237 28 10 22 2002 1276 296 245 12 16 17 2001 1132 264 250 4 12 15 2000 NOTHING WITH PUP NURSING DEAD CALLING BIRTH SEASON

Use of behaviour comment field Behaviour was codified into: Birth observations: BIRTH, STILLBIRTH, DEADPUP Breeder observations: NURSING, WITHPUP, CALLING Nothing: NURSINGYEARLING, SUCKLINGFROMCOW, DEAD, NOTHING, PREGNANT For each cow we know: Season it was tagged whether tagged or branded 4

How do we distinguish exactly which cows pupped and which were alive but didn t? There are a few definite breeders Most breeders could be identified if observed for long enough 1 3-year-olds are definite nonbreeders 37% of observations are breeder observations Occasionally non-breeders produce breeder observations 5

Probable breeder observations Number of breeder observations (excluding birth, stillbirth and dead pup) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Birth observed Stillbirth or dead pup observed 1- to 3-year-olds (offset) Other 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Total number of observations in a season 6

Two methods to estimating pupping rate 1. Specify a criterion that categorises each cow each season as a breeder or nonbreeder (e.g. a birth observation or at least 2 breeder observations) 2. Estimate probability density functions to explain observation frequencies that depend on whether a cow breeds. Estimate the proportion of breeders and non-breeders in the mixture 7

Breeder observations proportions Observation frequencies (branded; age >= 4 years) Number of breeder observations (excluding birth, stillbirth and dead pup) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Birth observed Stillbirth or dead pup observed Other Observation frequencies (tagged; age >= 4 years) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Total number of observations in a season 8

Error caused by criterion method Because the probability of getting a breeder observation each time a breeding cow is observed is only 0.37, some breeders will not be identified E.g. if a breeder is seen 4 times the probability of getting zero breeder observations is 0.63 4 =0.16 These observations will be indistinguishable from those of a non-breeder seen 4 times and the criterion method will wrongly identify it as a non-breeder 9

Method 2 Scenario mixtures Example scenario out of 256: 2000 breed 2001 breed 2002 breed 2003 non-breed 2004 non-breed 2005 non-breed 2006 breed 2007 non-breed Need to calculate the likelihood of the actual observations under each scenario, multiply it by the likelihood of that scenario and add them 10

Method 2 Another scenario Another scenario : 2000 breed 2001 non-breed 2002 breed 2003 non-breed 2004 breed 2005 non-breed 2006 breed 2007 non-breed The likelihood of a scenario depends on age, branded/tagged and the sequence, i.e. this one is less likely than the previous because of the serial correlation 11

Total observation frequencies Births incl dead (branded) Births & brandings (tagged) 0 5 10 15 N = 97 Mean = 25.82 CV = 0.32 0 5 10 15 N = 138 Mean = 13.13 CV = 0.56 Frequency of observations 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Breeder obs >0 (branded) N = 216 Mean = 25.76 CV = 0.38 0 5 10 15 20 Breeder obs >0 N = 727 Mean = 11.7 CV = 0.65 3-year-old (branded) 3-year-old (tagged) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 N = 13 Mean = 5.85 CV = 0.96 0 20 40 60 80 N = 213 Mean = 4.94 CV = 0.97 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Total number of observations in a season 12

Pupping rate conditional on last year Ratio breeders to total known alive (criterion-based) Proportion of observations that satisfy criterion 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 PREVIOUS SEASON All (N=2568) Pupped (N=703) Seen, no pup (N=789) Not seen (N=813) 5 10 15 20 Age 13

Died or not observed? Need to account for non-breeders that are alive but not sighted Can be done easily for individuals for the years before the last sighting If last sighting was before 2007 the cow may be dead or alive but not sighted We therefore estimate mortality parameters and treat the unseen cows as a mixture of dead, nonobserved non-breeders and a very few non-observed breeders 14

Mortality and nonobservability mixture Cow tagged year y t Observations year y-1 Observed Alive but not observed Dead Observations year y Observed Alive but not observed Dead 15

Pupping rate Estimated breeding probability Probability 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Population mean Pup previous year No pup previous year (31%) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Age 16

Survival and tag retention Probability of surviving following year Annual survival 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1992 1993 1991 1990 2003 1999 2001 2002 1998 2000 1987 Survival (including tag retention) First year cohort survival 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Age 17

Estimated observation proportions Group Total obs = 0 Percent Breeder obs = 0 Breeder obs = 1 Breeder obs 2 Percent of observed cows Branded breeders 0 2.3 4.9 92.8 Tagged breeders 1.8 10.3 15.1 74.6 Branded nonbreeders 50.4 99.2 0.5 0.3 Tagged nonbreeders 70.1 99.3 0.4 0.3 18

Total observation distributions Estimated total observation density Probability 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 Tagged breeders, zeros 1.8% Branded breeders, zeros 0% Tagged non-breeders (3 y), zeros 64.8% Tagged non-breeders (20 y), zeros 78.3% Branded non-breeders (3 y), zeros 43.4% Branded non-breeders (20 y), zeros 62.4% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Total observed 19

Total observations Total observations Negative binomial model (zeroes censored) Branded 'breeders' Tagged 'breeders' Frequency of total observations 0 5 10 15 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 N = 216 Ov er-dispersion 6.4 Fitted zeros 0% Negative binomial Poisson 'Non-breeders' branded + tagged N = 100 Ov er-dispersion 13.7 Fitted zeros 69.5% Negative binomial Poisson 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 N = 727 Ov er-dispersion 6.4 Fitted zeros 1.8% 3-year-olds Negative binomial Poisson N = 213 Ov er-dispersion 13.7 Fitted zeros 64.8% Negative binomial Poisson 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Count 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 20

Breeder observation frequencies Breeder observation frequencies (>3 years) Beta-binomial model Total obs 25 to 55 Total obs 20 to 24 Frequency of breeder observations 0 5 10 15 0 10 20 30 40 N =163 Est % non-breeders with 25-55 total obs 2 % branded 0.9 % tagged Beta-binomial Ov er-disp=2.8 Binomial Ov er-disp=0.6 Total obs 15 to 19 N =212 Est % non-breeders with 15-19 total obs 2.5 % branded 1.2 % tagged Beta-binomial Ov er-disp=1.5 Binomial Ov er-disp=0.6 0 5 10 15 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 N =148 Est % non-breeders with 20-24 total obs 1.4 % branded 0.7 % tagged Beta-binomial Ov er-disp=1.8 Binomial Ov er-disp=0.6 Total obs 10 to 14 N =313 Est % non-breeders with 10-14 total obs 4.8 % branded 2.4 % tagged Beta-binomial Ov er-disp=1.2 Binomial Ov er-disp=0.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 Count 0 10 20 30 40 50 21

Total observations as mixtures Observation frequencies Tagged 3-year-olds Tagged 4-5-year-olds 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 N = 213 Observ ed mean = 4.9 Fitted mean = 6 Breeders Non-breeders Total 0 20 60 100 N = 484 Observ ed mean = 7.8 Fitted mean = 8.2 Frequency of total observations 0 20 40 60 80 Tagged 6-7-year-olds N = 313 Observ ed mean = 7.7 Fitted mean = 8.8 0 20 40 60 80 Tagged 8-10-year-olds N = 476 Observ ed mean = 7.7 Fitted mean = 9.4 Tagged 11-14-year-olds Tagged 15-20-year-olds 0 20 40 60 80 N = 352 Observ ed mean = 8.8 Fitted mean = 11.7 0 2 4 6 8 N = 46 Observ ed mean = 5.7 Fitted mean = 11.3 0 10 30 50 Count 0 10 30 50 22

Some parameter values Parameter Max pupping rate (average) Max pupping rate (prev breeder) Max pupping rate (prev non-breeder) Age max pupping (y) Prob of a breeder obs (breeder) Prob of a breeder obs (non-breeder) Mean total obs/season (breeder) Mean total obs (branded breeder) Mean total obs (3 y, non-breeder) Mean total obs (20 y, non-breeder) Est 0.61 0.85 0.26 13 0.37 0.001 11.7 22.6 2.1 1.2 23

More parameter values Parameter Pupping rate reaches half max (y) Pupping rate falls to half max (y) Max survival & tag retention Age at max survival (y) Mean 1 st year survival (excl 1987) Survival at age 20 y Max observability (2003) Min observability (2000) Neg-binom overdispersion (breeders) Neg-binom overdispersion (nonbreeders) Est 7 17 0.99 2 0.54 0.55 1.20 0.49 6.4 13.7 24

Conclusions Necessary to estimate breeders with no breeder observations by using a mixture model (12% tagged breeders not identified) High breeding serial correlation (breeders 3 times as likely to breed following year) Maximum population pupping rate is 61% at age 13 y Possibly 20% of cows do not return to rookery each year (not modelled) First year survival varies a lot (37-73%) Observations over-dispersed (excessive zeros and ones) 25

Conclusions Estimated breeding probability Probability 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Population mean Pup previous year No pup previous year (31%) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Age 26