Assessing Capture Probabilities of Larval Pond-Breeding Anurans in New Brunswick, Canada
We used removal sampling (RS) and neutral red dye capture–mark–recapture (CMR) methods to estimate capture probabilities for larval Wood Frogs (Lithobates sylvaticus), Spring Peepers (Pseudacris crucifer), and first-year Green Frogs (Lithobates clamitans) in ponds in southern New Brunswick, Canada. We modeled capture probability as a function of environmental variables and tested whether marks were retained between surveys. We also performed simulations to understand the effect of survey effort, capture probability, and abundance on detection probabilities and the number of surveys needed to be confident of absence. Capture probabilities (P ± SD) were low and variable: Wood Frogs, P = 0.262 ± 0.128; Spring Peepers, P = 0.323 ± 0.241; and first-year Green Frogs, P = 0.159 ± 0.106. With the use of AICc, we determined a model with the proportion of non-Typha emergent vegetation to have a positive effect, whereas pond depth had a negative effort on capture probabilities in first-year Green Frog larvae. No covariate models were better than an intercept-only model for Wood Frogs or Spring Peepers. Observers missed the dye mark on 5–24% of the marked larvae. Simulations showed that at observed capture probabilities and low abundances (greater than 100 larvae) all species would be detected on average with a single survey of at least 20% of the pond, but more survey effort/repeat surveys would be required to detect smaller populations. We recommend that capture probabilities be estimated whenever abundance estimates are required.Abstract

Map showing the general location of the study site in New Brunswick, Canada.

Mean and bootstrapped confidence intervals of the mean of capture probabilities for Lithobates sylvaticus, Pseudacris crucifer, and L. clamitans larvae using both capture–mark–recapture (CMR) and removal sampling (RS) methods at wetlands in southern New Brunswick.

The number of larvae needed to be 95% certain of detection for Lithobates clamitans, L. sylvaticus, and Pseudacris crucifer at different sampling efforts. Survey effort 1 means a complete survey (methods used in this study) and, for example, 0.05 means 5% of the wetland surveyed.

The mean number of surveys required to detect Lithobates clamitans, L. sylvaticus, and Pseudacris crucifer at different abundances (1, 10, 100, and 1,000 larvae) with different sampling effort levels. Survey effort 1 means a complete survey (methods used in this study) and, for example, 0.05 means 5% of the wetland surveyed.
Contributor Notes