  A vast amount of ecological knowledge generated recently has hinged upon the
ability of model selection methods to discriminate among various ecological
hypotheses. The last decade has seen the rise of Bayesian hierarchical models
in ecology. Consequently, popular tools, such as the AIC, become largely
inapplicable and other tools are not universally applicable. We focus on a
class of competing Bayesian spatially explicit capture recapture (SECR) models
and first apply some of the recommended Bayesian model selection tools: (1)
Bayes Factor - using (a) Gelfand-Dey (b) harmonic mean methods, (2) DIC, (3)
WAIC and (4) the posterior predictive loss function. In all, we evaluate 25
variants of model selection tools in our study. We evaluate these model
selection tools from the standpoint of model selection and parameter estimation
by contrasting the choice recommended by a tool with a `true' model. In all, we
generate 120 simulated data sets using the true model and assess the frequency
with which the true model is selected and how well the tool estimates N
(population size). We find that when information content is low, no particular
tool can be recommended to help realise, simultaneously, both the goals of
model selection and parameter estimation. In such scenarios, we recommend that
practitioners utilise our application of Bayes Factor for parameter estimation
and recommend the posterior predictive loss approach for model selection when
information content is low. When both the objectives are taken together, we
recommend the use of our applications of Bayes Factor for Bayesian SECR models.
Our study reveals that although new model selection tools are emerging (eg:
WAIC) in the applied statistics literature, an uncritical absorption of these
new tools (i.e. without assessing their efficacies for the problem at hand)
into ecological practice may mislead inferences.
