Applications of step-selection functions in ecology and conservation

被引：422
作者：
Thurfjell H. [1 ]
Ciuti S. [1 ,2 ]
Boyce M.S. [1 ]
机构：
[1] University of Alberta, Department of Biological Sciences, Edmonton, T6G 2E9, AB
[2] University of Freiburg, Department of Biometry and Environmental System Analysis, Freiburg
来源：
Movement Ecology | / 2卷 / 1期
关键词：
Broken stick model; Geographic Information System GIS; GPS telemetry; Habitat selection; Individual modelling; Remote sensing; Resource Selection Function RSF; Resource Selection Probability Function RSPF; State-space model; Step Selection Function SSF;
D O I：
10.1186/2051-3933-2-4
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Recent progress in positioning technology facilitates the collection of massive amounts of sequential spatial data on animals. This has led to new opportunities and challenges when investigating animal movement behaviour and habitat selection. Tools like Step Selection Functions (SSFs) are relatively new powerful models for studying resource selection by animals moving through the landscape. SSFs compare environmental attributes of observed steps (the linear segment between two consecutive observations of position) with alternative random steps taken from the same starting point. SSFs have been used to study habitat selection, human-wildlife interactions, movement corridors, and dispersal behaviours in animals. SSFs also have the potential to depict resource selection at multiple spatial and temporal scales. There are several aspects of SSFs where consensus has not yet been reached such as how to analyse the data, when to consider habitat covariates along linear paths between observations rather than at their endpoints, how many random steps should be considered to measure availability, and how to account for individual variation. In this review we aim to address all these issues, as well as to highlight weak features of this modelling approach that should be developed by further research. Finally, we suggest that SSFs could be integrated with state-space models to classify behavioural states when estimating SSFs. © 2014 Thurfjell et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 67 条
[31]  
Boyce M.S., Mao J.S., Merrill E.H., Fortin D., Turner M.G., Fryxell J., Turchin P., Scale and heterogeneity in habitat selection by elk in Yellowstone National Park, Ecoscience, 10, pp. 421-431, (2003)
[32]  
Godvik I.M.R., Loe L.E., Vik J.O., Veiberg V., Langvatn R., Mysterud A., Temporal scales, trade-offs, and functional responses in red deer habitat selection, Ecology, 90, pp. 699-710, (2009)
[33]  
Nielsen S.E., Boyce M.S., Stenhouse G.B., Grizzly bears and forestry I. Selection of clearcuts by grizzly bears in west-central Alberta, Canada, Forest Ecol Manag, 199, pp. 51-65, (2004)
[34]  
Pettorelli N., Gaillard J.M., Yoccoz N.G., Duncan P., Maillard D., Delorme D., Van Laere G., Toigo C., The response of fawn survival to changes in habitat quality varies according to cohort quality and spatial scale, J Anim Ecol, 74, pp. 972-981, (2005)
[35]  
DeCesare N.J., Hebblewhite M., Schmiegelow F., Hervieux D., McDermid G.J., Neufeld L., Bradley M., Whittington J., Smith K.G., Morgantini L.E., Et al., Transcending scale dependence in identifying habitat with resource selection functions, Ecol Appl, 22, pp. 1068-1083, (2012)
[36]  
Olivier F., Wotherspoon S.J., Nest selection by snow petrels Pagodroma nivea in East Antarctica - Validating predictive habitat selection models at the continental scale, Ecol Model, 210, pp. 414-430, (2008)
[37]  
Bowyer R.T., Kie J.G., VanBallenberghe V., Sexual segregation in black-tailed deer: effects of scale, J Wildlife Manag, 60, pp. 10-17, (1996)
[38]  
Arthur S.M., Manly B.F.J., MacDonald L.L., Garner G.W., Assessing habitat selection when availability changes, Ecology, 77, pp. 215-227, (1996)
[39]  
Nams V.O., Sampling animal movement paths causes turn autocorrelation, Acta Biotheor, 61, pp. 269-284, (2013)
[40]  
Anderson K.E., Nisbet R.M., Diehl S., Cooper S.D., Scaling population responses to spatial environmental variability in advection-dominated systems, Ecol Lett, 8, pp. 933-943, (2005)
1234567