--- title: "Estimating extinction dates from sighting records" output: rmarkdown::html_vignette vignette: > %\VignetteIndexEntry{Estimating extinction dates from sighting records} %\VignetteEngine{knitr::rmarkdown} %\VignetteEncoding{UTF-8} --- ```{r, include = FALSE} knitr::opts_chunk$set(collapse = TRUE, comment = "#>", fig.width = 7, fig.height = 5) ``` ## Overview EDE implements methods for inference about extinction from sighting records and fossil ranges. Some estimate an endpoint directly; others test whether a species could plausibly have persisted to a candidate time. The tests return frequentist p-values, not posterior probabilities that the species is extant; the Bayesian models later in this vignette give those. Their source papers define no point estimate, so EDE reports the one-sided upper confidence bound obtained by inverting each test. The column containing these p-values is currently named `chance` for compatibility with EDE 0.1.0. ## Input and observation origin ```{r} library(EDE) years <- c(1900, 1902, 1903, 1905, 1907, 1908, 1910, 1912, 1915, 1918, 1920, 1923, 1925, 1928, 1930, 1933, 1936) counts <- c(4, 3, 5, 2, 3, 4, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1) sd <- sighting_data(data.frame(year = years, sightings = counts)) ``` The earliest supplied time defines the observation origin. Include an initial zero-count row if observation began before the first sighting. Methods differ in their treatment of counts, following their source papers: OLE, the Weibull test, both Solow (1993) tests and Burgman's tests count every sighting event; the Robson-Whitlock, Strauss-Sadler, McInerny, Solow-Roberts and Jarić-Ebenhard methods use only distinct sighting times. Strauss-Sadler, Solow-Roberts and Jarić-Ebenhard do not use the observation origin at all. ## Endpoint estimators `robson1964()` uses the final gap for a Quenouille-type bias-reduced point estimate and a one-sided confidence interval. `strauss1989()` supplies an unbiased endpoint estimate and one-sided interval under uniform occurrence. `ole()` fits the Weibull extreme-value model to the `k` most recent sighting events and reports the two-sided interval of Roberts & Solow (2003). ```{r} robson1964(sd) strauss1989(sd) ole(sd) ole(sd, k = 10) ``` ## Persistence tests ```{r} solow1993(sd, test_year = 2000) solow1993b(sd, test_year = 2000) solow2005(sd, test_year = 2000) mcinerny2006(sd, test_year = 2000) burgman1995(sd, test_year = 2000) solow_roberts2003(sd, test_year = 2000) jaric2010(sd, test_year = 2000) ``` - `solow1993()` assumes a stationary Poisson process. - `solow1993b()` allows an exponentially declining sighting rate. Its upper bound may not exist: the p-value has a positive floor however late the candidate time. - `solow2005()` uses the Weibull extreme-value p-value associated with OLE. Its bound is one-sided, so it equals the upper limit of `ole()` at twice the significance level. - `mcinerny2006()` conditions on the previous binary sighting rate. - `burgman1995()` uses discrete periods. By default it applies equation 2, the test for extinction based on the final run of empty periods; `equation = 4` tests for a change in conservation status using the longest empty run anywhere in the record. - `solow_roberts2003()` uses only the two most recent distinct sightings; its bound coincides with that of `robson1964()`. - `jaric2010()` uses the average interval and can adjust it for a trend in consecutive interval lengths. It is an index rather than a formal test. The full p-value curve is available with `data_out = TRUE`: ```{r} curve <- jaric2010(sd, test_year = 2000, data_out = TRUE) plot(curve$time, curve$chance, type = "l", xlab = "candidate time", ylab = "index") abline(h = 0.05, lty = 2) ``` ## A Bayesian view Under the constant-rate model, `solow1993_bayes()` gives the Bayes factor of Solow (1993a) in favour of persistence to a candidate time, assuming a uniform prior on the extinction time and a noninformative prior on the sighting rate. Combined with a prior probability of persistence, it gives the posterior probability that the species is extant, which is the quantity the p-values above do not provide. ```{r} solow1993_bayes(sd, test_year = 2000, prior = 0.5) ``` ## Uncertain sightings `jaric_roberts2014()` assigns a probability of validity to every sighting. EDE requires binary counts because reliability belongs to individual records; this is a package restriction, not one of the source paper. A sighting at the observation origin fixes the origin and its reliability is not used. ```{r} uncertain <- sighting_data(data.frame( year = c(1900, 1910, 1920, 1930), sightings = 1 )) jaric_roberts2014( uncertain, reliability = c(1.0, 0.9, 0.6, 0.3) ) ``` The result includes the effective number of sightings and the reliability-adjusted endpoint as additional components. Supply `test_year` to add the reliability-adjusted p-value of equations 7-8. Reliabilities should be elicited independently of the extinction analysis. Other approaches to uncertain sightings: - `thompson2013()` handles several observation types (for example specimens, expert sightings and local reports), each with its own range of detection and validity probabilities, in discrete time. - `brook2019()` resamples the record, keeping each sighting with probability equal to its reliability, and applies any EDE estimator to every sub-record. Solow (2023) criticised the statistical properties of the resulting date; the authors present it as pre-processing rather than an estimator, and its help page discusses both views. ## Other Bayesian models `rout2009()` generalises the Solow (1993a) Bayes factor to a sighting rate that declines as a power of time, and `rout2009_absences()` turns it into a decision rule: the number of consecutive absent surveys after which declaring eradication minimises the expected cost. `caley_barry2014()` models yearly detections with constant detection and extinction probabilities; its posterior is computed exactly: ```{r} fox <- sighting_data(data.frame(year = c(2001, 2003, 2005, 2006), count = 1)) caley_barry2014(fox, test_year = 2012) ``` ## Records and surveys `thompson2017()` implements the iterative model of Thompson et al. (2017), which underlies the IUCN Red List tool for estimating the probability that a taxon is extinct. Each year contributes either a record, with a probability of being correct, or a survey that failed to find the species, described by its extent, its chance of detecting the species and its reliability. Ranges for these quantities give interval and Monte Carlo bounds. `thompson2019()` casts the same data as Bayesian updating, in which each year's posterior is the next year's prior. ## Fossil ranges The same question arises for the last appearance of a taxon in the fossil record. `strauss1989()` assumes fossil horizons are uniformly distributed; `marshall1994()` drops that assumption and bounds the confidence interval using only the distribution of gap sizes, with `marshall1994_trend()` to test whether gap size changes through the section; `marshall1997()` accepts a fossil recovery potential that varies through the section; and `weiss_marshall1999()` gives a Bayesian estimate for sections sampled at discrete horizons, with absences recorded. EDE always estimates the end-point at the largest `time`, so ages in millions of years should be entered as `time = -age`, and first appearances as negative stratigraphic positions. ## Comparing methods `ede_compare()` applies every method that needs only the sighting record: ```{r} ede_compare(sighting_data(monk_seal), test_year = 2050) ``` ## Choosing a method - Use OLE when the recent record is sufficiently long and an extreme-value model is defensible. - Use `solow1993()` only when a constant sighting rate is plausible. - Use `solow1993b()` for an approximately exponential decline. - Use `jaric2010()` when the intervals themselves show a gradual trend. - Use `burgman1995()` for discrete frequency data; use `equation = 4` only for questions about a change in status. - Use `jaric_roberts2014()` when observations have explicit reliability assessments, and `thompson2013()` when they fall into types with uncertain detection probabilities. - Use `thompson2017()` when unsuccessful surveys are documented, as in an IUCN Red List assessment. - Use the Bayesian models when a posterior probability that the species is extant is needed; report the prior alongside it. Running several scientifically defensible methods is useful, but p-values from models whose assumptions are violated should not be combined or interpreted as extinction probabilities. ## References References for the methods introduced after the core estimators (Rout et al. 2009; Thompson et al. 2013, 2017, 2019; Caley & Barry 2014; Brook et al. 2019; Marshall 1994, 1997; Weiss & Marshall 1999) are given on the help page of each function. Burgman, M. A., Grimson, R. C., & Ferson, S. (1995). Inferring threat from scientific collections. *Conservation Biology*, 9(4), 923-928. Cooke, P. (1980). Optimal linear estimation of bounds of random variables. *Biometrika*, 67, 257-258. Jarić, I., & Ebenhard, T. (2010). A method for inferring extinction based on sighting records that change in frequency over time. *Wildlife Biology*, 16(3), 267-275. Jarić, I., & Roberts, D. L. (2014). Accounting for observation reliability when inferring extinction based on sighting records. *Biodiversity and Conservation*, 23(11), 2801-2815. McInerny, G. J., Roberts, D. L., Davy, A. J., & Cribb, P. J. (2006). Significance of sighting rate in inferring extinction and threat. *Conservation Biology*, 20(2), 562-567. Roberts, D. L., & Solow, A. R. (2003). When did the dodo become extinct? *Nature*, 426, 245. Robson, D. S., & Whitlock, J. H. (1964). Estimation of a truncation point. *Biometrika*, 51, 33-39. Solow, A. R. (1993a). Inferring extinction from sighting data. *Ecology*, 74, 962-964. Solow, A. R. (1993b). Inferring extinction in a declining population. *Journal of Mathematical Biology*, 32, 79-82. Solow, A. R. (2005). Inferring extinction from a sighting record. *Mathematical Biosciences*, 195, 47-55. Solow, A. R., & Roberts, D. L. (2003). A nonparametric test for extinction based on a sighting record. *Ecology*, 84, 1329-1332. Strauss, D., & Sadler, P. M. (1989). Classical confidence intervals and Bayesian probability estimates for ends of local taxon ranges. *Mathematical Geology*, 21, 411-427.