The Overview, Design concepts and Details (ODD) protocol for describing Individual-and Agent-Based Models (ABMs) is now widely accepted and used to document such models in journal articles. As a standardized document for providing a consistent, logical and readable account of the structure and dynamics of ABMs, some research groups also find it useful as a workflow for model design. Even so, there are still limitations to ODD that obstruct its more widespread adoption. Such limitations are discussed and addressed in this paper: the limited availability of guidance on how to use ODD; the length of ODD documents; limitations of ODD for highly complex models; lack of su icient details of many ODDs to enable reimplementation without access to the model code; and the lack of provision for sections in the document structure covering model design rationale, the model's underlying narrative, and the means by which the model's fitness for purpose is evaluated. We document the steps we have taken to provide better guidance on: structuring complex ODDs and an ODD summary for inclusion in a journal article (with full details in supplementary material; Table ); using ODD to JASSS, ( ) , http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/ / / .html Doi: . /jasss.point readers to relevant sections of the model code; update the document structure to include sections on model rationale and evaluation. We also further advocate the need for standard descriptions of simulation experiments and argue that ODD can in principle be used for any type of simulation model. Thereby ODD would provide a lingua franca for simulation modelling.

No abstract

No abstract

Habitat loss undeniably poses a substantial threat to biodiversity, but whether fragmentation per se drives the loss of species is still widely debated. While negative consequences from fragmentation are often anticipated, many empirical studies report positive effects. However, the intrinsic mechanisms governing species' persistence in fragmented landscapes are not yet understood. In this study we investigated consistent personality-dependent differences in foraging behavior among individuals as a possible mechanism underlying the discrepancy of reported fragmentation effects. We devised a mechanistic individual-based model simulating the home range behavior of a competitive small mammal community based on the availability of a shared resource. Thereby, an individual's risk-taking behavior dictates its foraging decisions at risky habitat edges, an inherent property of fragmentation per se. Our simulations show that differences in risktaking while foraging are potentially a further mechanism contributing to reconcile the fragmentation debate. The first scenario considering risk-seeking communities showed a neutral response towards fragmentation, while the second scenario featuring riskavoiding communities confirmed the negative effects of fragmentation. Notably, the third scenario, simulating behaviorally diverse communities including risk-avoiding and risk-seeking individuals, demonstrated a positive influence of fragmentation on biodiversity. Intraspecific differences in behavior could also enhance the temporal species coexistence (coviability) of communities threatened by an ongoing habitat loss. Our study highlights the importance of recognizing the behavioral composition of populations and communities for estimat®ing fragmentation effects, because differences in risk-taking can influence the coping abilities of animal communities in light of fragmentation.

No abstract