Transcending scale dependence in identifying habitat with resource selection functions

DeCesare, Nicholas J.; Hebblewhite, Mark; Schmiegelow, Fiona K. A.; Hervieux, David; McDermid, Gregory J.; Neufeld, Lalenia; Bradley, Mark P.; Whittington, Jesse; Smith, Kirby G.; Morgantini, Luigi E.; Wheatley, Matthew; Musiani, Marco

doi:10.1890/11-1610.1

Cited by 190 publications

(298 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

277

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This suggests that anthropogenic pressures affect habitat selection at a home‐range level, whilst environmental variables influence site‐level habitat selection (Boyce, 2018; DeCesare et al., 2012). A similar result was found for brown bears ( Ursus arctos ) in the Cantabrian Range, northwest Spain (Sánchez, Cushman, & Saura, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Klaassen

Broekhuis

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals select habitats that will ultimately optimize their fitness through access to favorable resources, such as food, mates, and breeding sites. However, access to these resources may be limited by bottom‐up effects, such as availability, and top‐down effects, such as risk avoidance and competition, including that with humans. Competition between wildlife and people over resources, specifically over space, has played a significant role in the worldwide decrease in large carnivores. The goal of this study was to determine the habitat selection of cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) in a human‐wildlife landscape at multiple spatial scales. Cheetahs are a wide‐ranging, large carnivore, whose significant decline is largely attributed to habitat loss and fragmentation. It is believed that 77% of the global cheetah population ranges outside protected areas, yet little is known about cheetahs’ resource use in areas where they co‐occur with people. The selection, or avoidance, of three anthropogenic variables (human footprint density, distance to main roads and wildlife areas) and five environmental variables (open habitat, semiclosed habitat, edge density, patch density and slope), at multiple spatial scales, was determined by analyzing collar data from six cheetahs. Cheetahs selected variables at different scales; anthropogenic variables were selected at broader scales (720–1440 m) than environmental variables (90–180 m), suggesting that anthropogenic pressures affect habitat selection at a home‐range level, whilst environmental variables influence site‐level habitat selection. Cheetah presence was best explained by human presence, wildlife areas, semiclosed habitat, edge density and slope. Cheetahs showed avoidance for humans and steep slopes and selected for wildlife areas and areas with high proportions of semiclosed habitat and edge density. Understanding a species’ resource requirements, and how these might be affected by humans, is crucial for conservation. Using a multiscale approach, we provide new insights into the habitat selection of a large carnivore living in a human‐wildlife landscape.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Klaassen

Broekhuis

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because selection patterns can change across scales (DeCesare et al 2012), it is imperative to understand the relationship between patterns observed at multiple spatiotemporal scales.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selection for forage and avoidance of risk by woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) at coarse and local scales

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The relationship between selection at coarse and fine spatiotemporal spatial scales is still poorly understood. Some authors claim that, to accommodate different needs at different scales, individuals should have contrasting selection patterns at different scales of selection, while others claim that coarse scale selection patterns should reflect fine scale selection decisions. Here we examine site selection by 110 woodland caribou equipped with GPS radio-collars with respect to forage availability and predation risk across a broad gradient in availability of both variables in boreal forests of Northern Ontario. We tested whether caribou selection for forage and avoidance of risk was consistent between coarse (seasonal home range) and fine scales of selection. We found that local selection patterns predicted coarse scale selection patterns, indicating a close relationship between the drivers of selection at both spatial scales.

show abstract

“…The scale-dependent hierarchy of landscape-organism interaction has been documented in light of predation risk and human disturbance [27,69]. Conversely, the scaling-up hypothesis suggests that fine-scale drivers are linked to the observations occurring at coarse scales [70].…”

Section: Choices Made When Building Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the use of patches by caribou (Rangifer tarandus) has been linked to both the intrinsic characteristics of a patch and those of the surrounding matrix [26]. In this case, the use of the PMM incorporates analysis at different scales, which is important for species that respond to disturbance at multiple scales [27]. The PMM also provides results (e.g., patch sizes necessary for habitat use) that can be directly applied to land and resource management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining Landscapes and Scales to Model Landscape–Organism Interactions

Boyce

Mallory

Morehouse

et al. 2017

Curr Landscape Ecol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of Review We review and provide comment on issues of scale in ecological studies in the context of two paradigms used to define landscapes: the patch-mosaic and gradient models. Our intent is to offer guidance for structuring habitat-selection models with examples of how scale, autocorrelation, measurement error, and choice of patch-mosaic or gradient models, analysis methods, and covariates by the researcher can influence inferences regarding landscapeorganism interactions. Recent Findings Methods that allow the organism or data to define the grain and extent of scale of the study offer promise by reducing subjectivity in choices of scale. Ultimately, we recommend that the ecological phenomenon of interest should shape the selection of models defining landscape-organism interaction; however, the choice of model remains with the researcher and is dependent on the research question and the availability of data. Clearly, both the patch-mosaic and gradient models can provide reasonable frameworks for study, and multiple scales that draw from both paradigms often may be most appropriate. Summary Scale has been identified as a crucial feature of landscape ecology, yet scale as a paradigm has offered little direction for ecologists. Likewise, debate contrasting gradient models and patch-mosaic models offers few new insights on how ecologists might decide on an appropriate scale for analysis of organism distribution or habitat selection. Various ecological processes influence organisms at different scales and modeling approaches need to be able to accommodate multiple scales simultaneously, which may vary by landscape structure and movement ecology. The continuum of scales and combinations of both gradient and patch-mosaic landscapes provides the necessary array of structures that can be used to construct combinations of landscape covariates that coincide with the ecology of the organism across scales.

show abstract

Transcending scale dependence in identifying habitat with resource selection functions

Cited by 190 publications

References 80 publications

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human‐wildlife landscape

Selection for forage and avoidance of risk by woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) at coarse and local scales

Defining Landscapes and Scales to Model Landscape–Organism Interactions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About