Table 1.
Summary of VES and eDNA occupancy model covariates.
Table 2.
VES and eDNA occupancy model results.
Table 3.
Wood turtle VES occupancy candidate models.
Table 4.
Wood turtle VES N-mixture candidate models.
Fig 1.
eDNA Detection probability and turtle density.
Relationship between eDNA detection probability and estimated turtle density based on the eDNA occupancy model using only occupied sites. Upper and lower confidence intervals are presented in the gray band.
Fig 2.
eDNA Detection probability and rainfall.
Relationship between eDNA detection probability and number of days since last rainfall based on the eDNA occupancy model using only occupied sites. Upper and lower confidence intervals are presented in the gray band.
Fig 3.
eDNA Detection probability and temperature.
Relationship between eDNA detection probability and water temperature (°C) based on the eDNA occupancy model using only occupied sites. Upper and lower confidence intervals are presented in the gray band.
Fig 4.
eDNA Detection probability and maximum flow accumulation.
Relationship between eDNA detection probability and maximum flow accumulation (no. of cells) based on the all sites eDNA occupancy model. Upper and lower confidence intervals are presented in the gray band.
Table 5.
Wood turtle eDNA occupancy candidate models.
Table 6.
Wood turtle eDNA OS occupancy candidate models.
Fig 5.
Cumulative detection probabilities.
Cumulative detection probability for turtle and eDNA occupancy. Cumulative detection probability was calculated based on the detection probability of the first survey or sample using model averaged estimates. Two VES surveys and four eDNA samples are needed to reach 0.95. Symbols are means with 95% confidence intervals. Horizontal dashed line shows where the cumulative detection probability is 0.95.
Table 7.
Cost comparison of VES and eDNA sampling approaches.