An evaluation of field and non-invasive genetic methods to estimate brown bear (Ursus arctos) population size

• Published in: Biological Conservation
• Main Authors: Solberg, K. H., Bellemain, E., Drageset, O. M., Taberlet, P., Swenson, J. E.
• Other Authors: Department of Ecology and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), Laboratoire d'Ecologie Alpine (LECA), Université Joseph Fourier - Grenoble 1 (UJF)-Université Savoie Mont Blanc (USMB Université de Savoie Université de Chambéry )-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA)
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: HAL CCSD 2006
• Subjects: Brown bear (Ursus arctos); Capture mark recapture; MARK estimator; Non-invasive sampling; Population size estimates; [SDE.BE]Environmental Sciences/Biodiversity and Ecology; [SDV.BID]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Biodiversity; [SDV.EE]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Ecology; environment; Ursus arctos
• Online Access: https://hal.science/halsde-00276510; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.09.025

Times Cited: 14 International audience Estimates of population size and density are essential for successful management and conservation of any species. Although there are a variety of methods available for estimating abundance and density of populations, most studies rely on only one estimator and very few studies have compared and critically evaluated the adequacy and the cost of these methods. We used the brown bear (Ursus arctos) in south-central Sweden to compare the performance of three different methods of estimating population size, including methods based on conventional field data as well as on non-invasive genetic data. The method based on observations of females with cubs underestimated the true population size, as the estimates were below the number of unique genotypes determined from faecal data inside the study area. The best traditional method was based on observations of bears from a helicopter. The genetic method using the closed population MARK estimator, as recommended in a previous study, seemed to perform the best. We conclude that approximately 223 (188-282) bears were present in our 7328 km(2) Study area during 2001 and 2002 and suggest that this hunted brown bear population has been relatively stable for about ten years. The non-invasive genetic method was less expensive than the most reliable traditional field method (a CMR method based on observations of bears from a helicopter), and preferable from an ethical point of view. We recommend that future studies using non-invasive genetic methods based on collected faecal samples should aim at collecting 2.5-3 times the number of faecal samples as the "assumed" number of animals. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.