Report of the NAMMCO-ICES Workshop on Seal Modelling (WKSEALS 2020)

S. Smout, K. Murray, G. Aarts, M. Biuw, S. Brasseur, A. Buren, Fanny Empacher, A. K. Frie, James Grecian, M. Hammill, B. Mikkelsen, A. Mosnier, A. Rosing-Asvid, D. Russell, H. Skaug, G. Stenson, L. Thomas, J. Hoef, L. Witting, V. Zabavnikov, Tor Arne Øigård, R. Fernández, F. Wickson
{"title":"Report of the NAMMCO-ICES Workshop on Seal Modelling (WKSEALS 2020)","authors":"S. Smout, K. Murray, G. Aarts, M. Biuw, S. Brasseur, A. Buren, Fanny Empacher, A. K. Frie, James Grecian, M. Hammill, B. Mikkelsen, A. Mosnier, A. Rosing-Asvid, D. Russell, H. Skaug, G. Stenson, L. Thomas, J. Hoef, L. Witting, V. Zabavnikov, Tor Arne Øigård, R. Fernández, F. Wickson","doi":"10.7557/3.5794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To support sustainable management of apex predator populations, it is important to estimate population size and understand the drivers of population trends to anticipate the consequences of human decisions. Robust population models are needed, which must be based on realistic biological principles and validated with the best available data. A team of international experts reviewed agestructured models of North Atlantic pinniped populations, including Grey seal (Halichoerus grypus), Harp seal (Pagophilus groenlandicus), and Hooded seal (Cystophora cristata). Statistical methods used to fit such models to data were compared and contrasted. Differences in biological assumptions and model equations were driven by the data available from separate studies, including observation methodology and pre-processing. Counts of pups during the breeding season were used in all models, with additional counts of adults and juveniles available in some. The regularity and frequency of data collection, including survey counts and vital rate estimates, varied. Important differences between the models concerned the nature and causes of variation in vital rates (age-dependent survival and fecundity). Parameterisation of age at maturity was detailed and time-dependent in some models and simplified in others. Methods for estimation of model parameters were reviewed and compared. They included Bayesian and maximum likelihood (ML) approaches, implemented via bespoke coding in C, C++, TMB or JAGS. Comparative model runs suggested that as expected, ML-based implementations were rapid and computationally efficient, while Bayesian approaches, which used MCMC or sequential importance sampling, required longer for inference. For grey seal populations in the Netherlands, where preliminary ML-based TMB results were compared with the outputs of a Bayesian JAGS implementation, some differences in parameter estimates were apparent. For these seal populations, further investigations are recommended to explore differences that might result from the modelling framework and model-fitting methodology, and their importance for inference and management advice. The group recommended building on the success of this workshop via continued collaboration with ICES and NAMMCO assessment groups, as well as other experts in the marine mammal modelling community. Specifically, for Northeast Atlantic harp and hooded seal populations, the workshop represents the initial step towards a full ICES benchmark process aimed at revising and evaluating new assessment models.","PeriodicalId":30560,"journal":{"name":"NAMMCO Scientific Publications","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NAMMCO Scientific Publications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7557/3.5794","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

To support sustainable management of apex predator populations, it is important to estimate population size and understand the drivers of population trends to anticipate the consequences of human decisions. Robust population models are needed, which must be based on realistic biological principles and validated with the best available data. A team of international experts reviewed agestructured models of North Atlantic pinniped populations, including Grey seal (Halichoerus grypus), Harp seal (Pagophilus groenlandicus), and Hooded seal (Cystophora cristata). Statistical methods used to fit such models to data were compared and contrasted. Differences in biological assumptions and model equations were driven by the data available from separate studies, including observation methodology and pre-processing. Counts of pups during the breeding season were used in all models, with additional counts of adults and juveniles available in some. The regularity and frequency of data collection, including survey counts and vital rate estimates, varied. Important differences between the models concerned the nature and causes of variation in vital rates (age-dependent survival and fecundity). Parameterisation of age at maturity was detailed and time-dependent in some models and simplified in others. Methods for estimation of model parameters were reviewed and compared. They included Bayesian and maximum likelihood (ML) approaches, implemented via bespoke coding in C, C++, TMB or JAGS. Comparative model runs suggested that as expected, ML-based implementations were rapid and computationally efficient, while Bayesian approaches, which used MCMC or sequential importance sampling, required longer for inference. For grey seal populations in the Netherlands, where preliminary ML-based TMB results were compared with the outputs of a Bayesian JAGS implementation, some differences in parameter estimates were apparent. For these seal populations, further investigations are recommended to explore differences that might result from the modelling framework and model-fitting methodology, and their importance for inference and management advice. The group recommended building on the success of this workshop via continued collaboration with ICES and NAMMCO assessment groups, as well as other experts in the marine mammal modelling community. Specifically, for Northeast Atlantic harp and hooded seal populations, the workshop represents the initial step towards a full ICES benchmark process aimed at revising and evaluating new assessment models.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
NAMMCO-ICES密封建模研讨会报告(WKSEALS 2020)
为了支持顶端捕食者种群的可持续管理,重要的是估计种群规模和了解种群趋势的驱动因素,以预测人类决策的后果。需要健壮的种群模型,这些模型必须基于现实的生物学原理,并用现有的最佳数据进行验证。一个国际专家小组审查了北大西洋鳍状动物种群的年龄结构模型,包括灰海豹(Halichoerus grypus)、格陵兰海豹(Pagophilus groenlandicus)和冠海豹(Cystophora cristata)。对用于拟合这些模型的统计方法进行了比较和对比。生物学假设和模型方程的差异是由来自不同研究的数据驱动的,包括观察方法和预处理。在所有的模型中都使用了繁殖季节的幼崽数量,在一些模型中还使用了额外的成年和幼年数量。数据收集的规律和频率,包括调查计数和生命率估计,各不相同。这些模型之间的重要差异涉及生命率(随年龄变化的存活率和繁殖力)变化的性质和原因。成熟年龄的参数化在一些模型中是详细的和随时间变化的,而在另一些模型中则是简化的。对模型参数的估计方法进行了综述和比较。它们包括贝叶斯和最大似然(ML)方法,通过C、c++、TMB或JAGS的定制编码实现。比较模型运行表明,正如预期的那样,基于ml的实现快速且计算效率高,而使用MCMC或顺序重要性抽样的贝叶斯方法需要更长的时间来进行推理。对于荷兰的灰海豹种群,将基于ml的初步TMB结果与贝叶斯JAGS实现的输出进行比较,在参数估计方面存在一些明显的差异。对于这些海豹种群,建议进行进一步的调查,以探索建模框架和模型拟合方法可能导致的差异,以及它们对推断和管理建议的重要性。该小组建议,通过继续与国际海洋研究中心和NAMMCO评估小组以及海洋哺乳动物建模界的其他专家合作,在本次讲习班取得成功的基础上再创新的成绩。具体而言,对于东北大西洋竖琴和帽海豹种群,研讨会代表了迈向完整的ICES基准过程的第一步,旨在修订和评估新的评估模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
52 weeks
期刊最新文献
Application of the Precautionary Approach to the Management of Marine Mammals in northern Canada Addressing epistemic injustices in species at risk assessments through improved credibility and legitimacy: case study of narwhal management in Ittoqqortoormiit In Memoriam: Gísli Arnór Víkingsson — 1956 - 2022 Bearded seals in the Atlantic Arctic: review of post 2010 knowledge available for informing stock assessments Preface
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1