As the practice of using population models for wildlife risk assessment has become more common, so has the practice of using surrogate data, typically taken from the published scientific literature, as inputs for demographic models. This practice clearly exposes the user to inferential errors. However, it is likely to continue because demographic data are expensive to gather. We review potential errors associated with the use of previously published demographic data and how those errors propagate into the endpoints of demographic projection models. We suggest methods for inferring bias in model endpoints when multiple and opposing biases are present in the demographic input data. We provide an example using Eastern Meadowlarks (Sturnella magna), a common songbird in Midwestern grasslands and agro-ecosystems. We conclude with a brief review of methods that could improve inference made using published demographic data, including methods from life-history theory, meta-analysis, and Bayesian statistics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Etterson et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: