Table 4. Estimates of state parameters in occupancy modeling derived from detection histories gathered in southern Illinois, Dec 2015 –Feb 2016.

Species	Method	Naïve Ψ a	Ψ(.)b	p (.)c	SE(p)d	Measurement Error (1-p)
Bobcat	One Camera	0.15	1.000	0.030	0.017	0.970
	Two Cameras	0.15	0.277	0.144	0.125	0.856
	Four Cameras	0.25	0.414	0.169	0.101	0.831
Coyote	One Camera	0.15	0.277	0.144	0.125	0.856
	Two Cameras	0.15	0.277	0.144	0.125	0.856
	Four Cameras	0.25	0.414	0.169	0.101	0.831
Virginia Opossum	One Camera	0.25	0.294	0.204	0.118	0.796
	Two Cameras	0.30	0.414	0.169	0.101	0.831
	Four Cameras	0.45	0.894	0.113	0.071	0.887
White-tailed Deer	One Camera	0.40	0.557	0.179	0.087	0.821
	Two Cameras	0.60	0.685	0.277	0.074	0.723
	Four Cameras	0.70	0.718	0.376	0.069	0.624

Naïve occupancy estimates were calculated by methods presented in MacKenzie et al. (2002), and represent the proportion of total sites at which a species was detected. Occupancy and detection estimates presented are the transformed beta estimates from the null model [Ψ(.) p(.)].

^aThe proportion of sites a species was actually detected

^bOccupancy probability–the estimation of the proportion of sites occupied, given the detection history of a species.

^cDetection probability–the probability of detecting a species, given it is present.

^dStandard Error of detection probability estimates.