kernicholson wrote:Just hoping for a quick clarification and recommendation to report my results. I ran known fate survival estimation. I had 3 encounters to give me 2 periods that I was calculating the survival estimate for. Those periods were 3 months in the summer and then 8 months over winter.
So, for a time-dependent model, you have 2 reported estimates -- one for 'summer', and one for 'over-winter'.
My question is regarding how to report monthly survival or the yearly survival. The estimate of apparent survival is 0.98. Which I believe is the estimate to survive the entire observation period (11 months).
.
No. Not sure why you're referring to only a single estimate -- you should have 2 (noted above): 'summer' and 'over-winter'.
More to the point, for any given estimate, you need to specify the interval before you run your analysis. If you do this correctly, for (say) summer, and tell MARK (or whatever software you're using -- I'll assume MARK) that the your intervals are 3 and 8, then MARK will report the
![\sqrt[3]{\phi} \sqrt[3]{\phi}](/forum/latexrender/pictures/3981e2c261026eb54ae6ebae85931cde.gif)
and
![\sqrt[8]{\phi} \sqrt[8]{\phi}](/forum/latexrender/pictures/624f95b2e269ec26acea6376b31dd31a.gif)
respectively -- meaning you'll get a monthly estimate for summer, and a monthly estimate for 'over-winter'.
So, if I were to report the monthly survival is it reasonable to take 0.98^3 and 0.98^8 and talk about the seasonal monthly estimates, or simply take 0.98^11 to get averaged monthly survival?
Thanks for your suggestions!
If you set the interval correctly in MARK, then it is already reporting your 'average' monthly value (not a true 'average' -- merely the n-th root of the interval over n months).
You really need to read the -sidebar- beginning on p. 25 of Chapter 4 of the MARK book:
http://www.phidot.org/software/mark/doc ... /chap4.pdf