These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28306735)

  • 1. Effects of social organization, trap arrangement and density, sampling scale, and population density on bias in population size estimation using some common mark-recapture estimators.
    Gupta M; Joshi A; Vidya TN
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(3):e0173609. PubMed ID: 28306735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Trap configuration and spacing influences parameter estimates in spatial capture-recapture models.
    Sun CC; Fuller AK; Royle JA
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(2):e88025. PubMed ID: 24505361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
    Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Multiple data sources improve DNA-based mark-recapture population estimates of grizzly bears.
    Boulanger J; Kendall KC; Stetz JB; Roon DA; Waits LP; Paetkau D
    Ecol Appl; 2008 Apr; 18(3):577-89. PubMed ID: 18488618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of camera trap-based abundance estimators for unmarked populations.
    Amburgey SM; Yackel Adams AA; Gardner B; Hostetter NJ; Siers SR; McClintock BT; Converse SJ
    Ecol Appl; 2021 Oct; 31(7):e02410. PubMed ID: 34255398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Sources of bias in applying close-kin mark-recapture to terrestrial game species with different life histories.
    Sévêque A; Lonsinger RC; Waits LP; Brzeski KE; Komoroske LM; Ott-Conn CN; Mayhew SL; Norton DC; Petroelje TR; Swenson JD; Morin DJ
    Ecology; 2024 Mar; 105(3):e4244. PubMed ID: 38272487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Precision and bias of spatial capture-recapture estimates: A multi-site, multi-year Utah black bear case study.
    Schmidt GM; Graves TA; Pederson JC; Carroll SL
    Ecol Appl; 2022 Jul; 32(5):e2618. PubMed ID: 35368131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Reducing effects of dispersal on the bias of 2-sample mark-recapture estimators of stream fish abundance.
    McNair JN; Ruetz CR; Carlson A; Suh J
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(8):e0200733. PubMed ID: 30067773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effective sociodemographic population assessment of elusive species in ecology and conservation management.
    Head JS; Boesch C; Robbins MM; Rabanal LI; Makaga L; Kühl HS
    Ecol Evol; 2013 Sep; 3(9):2903-16. PubMed ID: 24101982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Trap array configuration influences estimates and precision of black bear density and abundance.
    Wilton CM; Puckett EE; Beringer J; Gardner B; Eggert LS; Belant JL
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(10):e111257. PubMed ID: 25350557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Robustness of close-kin mark-recapture estimators to dispersal limitation and spatially varying sampling probabilities.
    Conn PB; Bravington MV; Baylis S; Ver Hoef JM
    Ecol Evol; 2020 Jun; 10(12):5558-5569. PubMed ID: 32607174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reliability of different mark-recapture methods for population size estimation tested against reference population sizes constructed from field data.
    Grimm A; Gruber B; Henle K
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(6):e98840. PubMed ID: 24896260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Avoiding bias in estimates of population size for translocation management.
    Bickerton KT; Ewen JG; Canessa S; Cole NC; Frost F; Mootoocurpen R; McCrea R
    Ecol Appl; 2023 Dec; 33(8):e2918. PubMed ID: 37688800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A Comparison of Grizzly Bear Demographic Parameters Estimated from Non-Spatial and Spatial Open Population Capture-Recapture Models.
    Whittington J; Sawaya MA
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(7):e0134446. PubMed ID: 26230262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. How does spatial study design influence density estimates from spatial capture-recapture models?
    Sollmann R; Gardner B; Belant JL
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(4):e34575. PubMed ID: 22539949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Pairing field methods to improve inference in wildlife surveys while accommodating detection covariance.
    Clare J; McKinney ST; DePue JE; Loftin CS
    Ecol Appl; 2017 Oct; 27(7):2031-2047. PubMed ID: 28644579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A new mark-recapture approach for abundance estimation of social species.
    Hickey JR; Sollmann R
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(12):e0208726. PubMed ID: 30571710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accounting for female reproductive cycles in a superpopulation capture-recapture framework.
    Carroll EL; Childerhouse SJ; Fewster RM; Patenaude NJ; Steel D; Dunshea G; Boren L; Baker CS
    Ecol Appl; 2013 Oct; 23(7):1677-90. PubMed ID: 24261048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Integration of mark-recapture and acoustic detections for unbiased population estimation in animal communities.
    Jarrett C; Haydon DT; Morales JM; Ferreira DF; Forzi FA; Welch AJ; Powell LL; Matthiopoulos J
    Ecology; 2022 Oct; 103(10):e3769. PubMed ID: 35620844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessing tiger population dynamics using photographic capture-recapture sampling.
    Karanth KU; Nichols JD; Kumar NS; Hines JE
    Ecology; 2006 Nov; 87(11):2925-37. PubMed ID: 17168036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.