Home‐range analysis using radio‐tracking data–a review of problems and techniques particularly as applied to the study of mammals

Abstract

Ninety‐three papers on home‐range analysis using radio‐tracking data were reviewed; these papers were found in a literature search of 18 of the major journals likely to include such papers, published in the 5‐year period to the end of 1988. The review showed that even 25 years after the first radio‐tracking studies, in the majority of papers there was still insufficient attention given to accurate and sufficient data collection, and to using appropriate and sophisticated analytical techniques to assess home‐range size and configuration. This paper is designed to help people undertaking a radio‐tracking study to avoid some of the most common pitfalls. It is based on some of the problems we have experienced studying several species of larger mammals. We use our collective experience to produce a guide on how to plan a radio‐tracking study, to highlight some of the potential problems in designing the study and collecting the data, and to identify some of the difficulties that may be encountered during the analytical stages. The advantages and disadvantages of the most frequently used methods of home‐range analysis are discussed and methods for determining the minimum number of radio‐fixes and techniques for adjusting inadequate sample sizes are described, as are the problems that may be caused by autocorrelated data.

Choice of analytical method can have dramatic effects on primate home range estimates

“…Moreover, the decision of setting a grid cell size shall be based on the average (or median) distance between consecutive locations (White and Garrott 1990), and -in case of application of GPS -also take into consideration satellite reception and associated It is beyond the scope of this methodological discourse to examine other relatively complex techniques such as Fourier series and fractal estimators in more detail (for more exhaustive reviews see e.g. (Harris et al 1990, White and Garrott 1990, Powell 2000, Sterling et al 2000, Kernohan et al 2001. Recently, Kernel methods have become increasingly widespread in primate/animal ecology and are considered rather powerful (given that some underlying assumption such as independence of locational observations are met), e.g.…”

“…An MCP is constructed by connecting the outer locations to form a convex polygon, and then the area of this polygon is calculated (Hayne 1949, White and Garrott 1990, Harris et al 1990). …”

Movements of Marine Fish and Decapod Crustaceans: Process, Theory and Application

“…Four widely-used functions in the preliminary analyses of movement data have been demonstrated on data from a sonic-tracking study of Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis) in Glacier Bay, Alaska (Hooge et al, 1999) (Figure 15). For overviews of the advantages and disadvantages of the many home range estimation techniques, refer to Boulanger and White (1990), Harris et al (1990), Larkin and Halkin (1994), Hooge et al (1999) and Powell (2000). Moorcroft et al (1999) argued that while the majority of traditional statistical models provided useful information, they are purely descriptive, with no mechanistic basis.…”

The role of testosterone in male downy woodpeckers in winter home range use, mate interactions and female foraging behaviour

“…To exclude these areas from our characterization of space use, we used a fixed kernel estimator using least-squares crossvalidation to determine the smoothing factor (Hooge & Eichenlaub 1997). With this technique, we calculated the size of core-use areas within the 95%, 75%, 50% and 35% isopleths (Harris et al 1990). These 'use areas' represent the percentage of an individual's activity taking place within the specified area.…”