
Abstract Spatial capture–recapture (SCR) has emerged as the industry standard for estimating population density by leveraging information from spatial locations of repeat encounters of individuals. The precision of density estimates depends fundamentally on the number and spatial configuration of traps. Despite this knowledge, existing sampling design recommendations are heuristic and their performance remains untested for most practical applications. To address this issue, we propose a genetic algorithm that minimizes any sensible, criteria‐based objective function to produce near‐optimal sampling designs. To motivate the idea of optimality, we compare the performance of designs optimized using three model‐based criteria related to the probability of capture. We use simulation to show that these designs outperform those based on existing recommendations in terms of bias, precision, and accuracy in the estimation of population size. Our approach, available as a function in the R package oSCR, allows conservation practitioners and researchers to generate customized and improved sampling designs for wildlife monitoring.
Optimal design, QH301 Biology, Spatially-explicit capture-recapture, Density, spatially explicit capture–recapture, QH301, camera traps, Trap spacing, genetic algorithm, Animals, Computer Simulation, optimal design, spatial sampling, Population Density, density, Ecology, Sampling design, Camera traps, DAS, 004, Genetic algorithm, sampling design, spatial capture–recapture, Spatial capture-recapture, Spatial sampling, trap spacing, SCR
Optimal design, QH301 Biology, Spatially-explicit capture-recapture, Density, spatially explicit capture–recapture, QH301, camera traps, Trap spacing, genetic algorithm, Animals, Computer Simulation, optimal design, spatial sampling, Population Density, density, Ecology, Sampling design, Camera traps, DAS, 004, Genetic algorithm, sampling design, spatial capture–recapture, Spatial capture-recapture, Spatial sampling, trap spacing, SCR
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 38 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
