Identifying presence or absence of grizzly and polar bear cubs from the movements of adult females with machine learning
Background Information on reproductive success is crucial to understanding population dynamics but can be difficult to obtain, particularly for species that birth while denning. For grizzly ( Ursus arctos ) and polar bears ( U. maritimus ), den visits are impractical because of safety and logistical considerations. Reproduction is typically documented through direct observation, which can be difficult, costly, and often occurs long after den departure. Reproduction could be documented remotely, however, from post-denning movement data if discernable differences exist between females with and without cubs. Methods We trained support vector machines (SVMs) with eight variables derived from telemetry data of female grizzly (2000–2022) and polar bears (1985–2016) with or without cubs during seven periods with lengths ranging from 5 to 60 days starting at den departure. We assessed SVM classification accuracy by withholding two samples (one cub-present, one cub-absent), training SVMs with the remaining data, predicting classification of the withheld samples, and repeating this process for each sample combination. Additionally, we evaluated how classification accuracy for grizzly bears was influenced by sample size, length of the post-departure period, and frequency of standardized location estimates. Results Accuracy of predicting cub presence or absence was 87% for grizzly bears with only 5 days of post-departure data and increased to a maximum of 92% with 20 days of data. For polar bears, accuracy was 86% at 5 days post-departure and increased to a maximum of 93% at 50 days. Classification accuracy for grizzly bears increased from 76 to 90% when sample size increased from 10 to 30 bears while holding period length constant (30 days) but did not increase at larger sample sizes. When sample size was held constant, increasing the length of the post-departure period did not affect classification accuracy markedly. Conclusion Presence or absence of grizzly and polar bear cubs can be identified with high accuracy even when SVM models are trained with limited data. Detecting cub presence or absence remotely could improve estimates of reproductive success and litter survival, enhancing our understanding of factors affecting cub recruitment.