DETECTION OF BIAS IN HARVEST-BASED ESTIMATES OF CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE PREVALENCE IN MULE DEER

Diseased animals may exhibit behavioral shifts that increase or decrease their probability of being randomly sampled. In harvest-based sampling approaches, animal movements, changes in habitat utilization, changes in breeding behaviors during harvest periods, or differential susceptibility to harvest via behaviors like hiding or decreased sensitivity to stimuli may result in a non-random sample that biases prevalence estimates. We present a method that can be used to determine whether bias exists in prevalence estimates from harvest samples. Using data from harvested mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) sampled in northcentral Colorado (USA) during fall hunting seasons 1996–98 and Akaike's information criterion (AIC) model selection, we detected within-yr trends indicating potential bias in harvest-based prevalence estimates for chronic wasting disease (CWD). The proportion of CWD-positive deer harvested slightly increased through time within a yr. We speculate that differential susceptibility to harvest or breeding season movements may explain the positive trend in proportion of CWD-positive deer harvested during fall hunting seasons. Detection of bias may provide information about temporal patterns of a disease, suggest biological hypotheses that could further understanding of a disease, or provide wildlife managers with information about when diseased animals are more or less likely to be harvested. Although AIC model selection can be useful for detecting bias in data, it has limited utility in determining underlying causes of bias. In cases where bias is detected in data using such model selection methods, then design-based methods (i.e., experimental manipulation) may be necessary to assign causality.

[1]  H. Akaike INFORMATION THEORY AS AN EXTENSION OF THE MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD , 1973 .

[2]  Brian L. Joiner,et al.  Lurking Variables: Some Examples , 1981 .

[3]  Clifford M. Hurvich,et al.  Regression and time series model selection in small samples , 1989 .

[4]  A. Agresti An introduction to categorical data analysis , 1997 .

[5]  E. Williams,et al.  Spongiform encephalopathies in Cervidae. , 1992, Revue scientifique et technique.

[6]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Modeling Survival and Testing Biological Hypotheses Using Marked Animals: A Unified Approach with Case Studies , 1992 .

[7]  E. Williams,et al.  Neuropathology of Chronic Wasting Disease of Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and Elk (Cervus elaphus nelsoni) , 1993, Veterinary pathology.

[8]  J. Miller,et al.  Immunohistochemical Detection of Prion Protein in Sheep with Scrapie , 1993, Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc.

[9]  K. Burnham,et al.  Model selection: An integral part of inference , 1997 .

[10]  M. Miller,et al.  SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY IN FREE-RANGING MULE DEER (ODOCOILEUS HEMIONUS), WHITE-TAILED DEER (ODOCOILEUS VIRGINIANUS) AND ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK (CERVUS ELAPHUS NELSONI) IN NORTHCENTRAL COLORADO , 1997, Journal of wildlife diseases.

[11]  D. Knowles,et al.  Monoclonal Antibody F89/160.1.5 Defines a Conserved Epitope on the Ruminant Prion Protein , 1998, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[12]  A. McQuarrie,et al.  Regression and Time Series Model Selection , 1998 .

[13]  F. Courchamp,et al.  DETECTION, IDENTIFICATION, AND CORRECTION OF A BIAS IN AN EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDY , 2000, Journal of wildlife diseases.

[14]  E. Williams,et al.  EPIZOOTIOLOGY OF CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE IN FREE-RANGING CERVIDS IN COLORADO AND WYOMING , 2000, Journal of wildlife diseases.