When are genetic methods useful for estimating contemporary abundance and detecting population trends?
Article first published online: 12 FEB 2010
© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Molecular Ecology Resources
Volume 10, Issue 4, pages 684–692, July 2010
How to Cite
TALLMON, D. A., GREGOVICH, D., WAPLES, R. S. , SCOTT BAKER, C., JACKSON, J., TAYLOR, B. L., ARCHER, E., MARTIEN, K. K., ALLENDORF, F. W. and SCHWARTZ, M. K. (2010), When are genetic methods useful for estimating contemporary abundance and detecting population trends?. Molecular Ecology Resources, 10: 684–692. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02831.x
- Issue published online: 11 JUN 2010
- Article first published online: 12 FEB 2010
- Received 20 September 2009; revision received 14 December 2009; accepted 23 December 2009
- effective population size;
- genetic monitoring;
- population size;
- population trend
The utility of microsatellite markers for inferring population size and trend has not been rigorously examined, even though these markers are commonly used to monitor the demography of natural populations. We assessed the ability of a linkage disequilibrium estimator of effective population size (Ne) and a simple capture-recapture estimator of abundance (N) to quantify the size and trend of stable or declining populations (true N = 100–10,000), using simulated Wright–Fisher populations. Neither method accurately or precisely estimated abundance at sample sizes of S = 30 individuals, regardless of true N. However, if larger samples of S = 60 or 120 individuals were collected, these methods provided useful insights into abundance and trends for populations of N = 100–500. At small population sizes (N = 100 or 250), precision of the Ne estimates was improved slightly more by a doubling of loci sampled than by a doubling of individuals sampled. In general, monitoring Ne proved a more robust means of identifying stable and declining populations than monitoring N over most of the parameter space we explored, and performance of the Ne estimator is further enhanced if the Ne/N ratio is low. However, at the largest population size (N = 10,000), N estimation outperformed Ne. Both methods generally required ≥ 5 generations to pass between sampling events to correctly identify population trend.