Abstract
Studying the social behaviour of small or cryptic species often relies on constructing networks from sparse point-based observations of individuals (e.g. live trapping data). A common approach assumes that individuals that have been detected sequentially in the same trapping location will also be more likely to have come into indirect and/or direct contact. However, there is very little guidance on how much data are required for making robust networks from such data. In this study, we highlight that sequential trap sharing networks broadly capture shared space use (and, hence, the potential for contact) and that it may be more parsimonious to directly model shared space use. We first use empirical data to show that characteristics of how animals use space can help us to establish new ways to model the potential for individuals to come into contact. We then show that a method that explicitly models individuals' home ranges and subsequent overlap in space among individuals (spatial overlap networks) requires fewer data for inferring observed networks that are more strongly correlated with the true shared space use network (relative to sequential trap sharing networks). Furthermore, we show that shared space use networks based on estimating spatial overlap are also more powerful for detecting biological effects. Finally, we discuss when it is appropriate to make inferences about social interactions from shared space use. Our study confirms the potential for using sparse trapping data from cryptic species to address a range of important questions in ecology and evolution. Significance statement Characterising animal social networks requires repeated (co-)observations of individuals. Collecting sufficient data to characterise the connections among individuals represents a major challenge when studying cryptic organisms-such as small rodents. This study draws from existing spatial mark-recapture data to inspire an approach that constructs networks by estimating space use overlap (representing the potential for contact). We then use simulations to demonstrate that the method provides consistently higher correlations between inferred (or observed) networks and the true underlying network compared to current approaches and requires fewer observations to reach higher correlations. We further demonstrate that these improvements translate to greater network accuracy and to more power for statistical hypothesis testing.