Optimizing the size of the area surveyed for monitoring a Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) population in the Swiss Alps by means of photographic capture-recapture

We studied the influence of surveyed area size on density estimates by means of camera-trapping in a low-density felid population (1-2 individuals/100 km(2) ). We applied non-spatial capture-recapture (CR) and spatial CR (SCR) models for Eurasian lynx during winter 2005/2006 in the northwestern Swiss Alps by sampling an area divided into 5 nested plots ranging from 65 to 760 km(2) . CR model density estimates (95% CI) for models M0 and Mh decreased from 2.61 (1.55-3.68) and 3.6 (1.62-5.57) independent lynx/100 km(2) , respectively, in the smallest to 1.20 (1.04-1.35) and 1.26 (0.89-1.63) independent lynx/100 km(2) , respectively, in the largest area surveyed. SCR model density estimates also decreased with increasing sampling area but not significantly. High individual range overlaps in relatively small areas (the edge effect) is the most plausible reason for this positive bias in the CR models. Our results confirm that SCR models are much more robust to changes in trap array size than CR models, thus avoiding overestimation of density in smaller areas. However, when a study is concerned with monitoring population changes, large spatial efforts (area surveyed ≥760 km(2) ) are required to obtain reliable and precise density estimates with these population densities and recapture rates.

Apes’ tracking of objects and collections

Recent research suggests that great apes are less vulnerable to cohesion violations than human infants are. In contrast to human infants, apes successfully track nonsolid substances or split solid objects through occlusion (Cacchione & Call, 2010a; Cacchione, Hrubesch, & Call, 2012, 2013). The present study aims to investigate whether the lower vulnerability of great apes to cohesion violations also manifests when they are tracking collections. While even very young human infants appreciate the continuous existence of solid bound objects, they fail to show similar intuitions when tracking collections of objects (Chiang & Wynn, 2000). In a manual search task inspired by recent infant research, we tested whether humans’ closest relatives, the great apes, showed a similar contrast in their reasoning about single solid objects and objects within collections. The results suggest that, in contrast to human infants, great apes appreciate the continuous existence of objects within collections and successfully track them through occlusion. This confirms the view that great apes are generally less vulnerable to cohesion violations than human infants.