Search bioRxiv⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Drescher-Lehman, J.

Publications and source records attributed to Drescher-Lehman, J..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Clarifying space use concepts in ecology: range vs. occurrence distributions

Quantifying animal movements is necessary for answering a wide array of research questions in ecology and conservation biology. Consequently, ecologists have made considerable efforts to identify the best way to estimate an animals home range, and many methods of estimating home ranges have arisen over the past half century. Most of these methods fall into two distinct categories of estimators that have only recently been described in statistical detail: those that measure range distributions (methods such as Kernel Density Estimation that quantify the long-run behavior of a movement process that features restricted space use) and those that measure occurrence distributions (methods such as Brownian Bridge Movement Models and the Correlated Random Walk Library that quantify uncertainty in an animal movement path during a specific period of observation). In this paper, we use theory, simulations, and empirical analysis to demonstrate the importance of applying these two classes of space use estimators appropriately and distinctly. Conflating range and occurrence distributions can have serious consequences for ecological inference and conservation practice. For example, in most situations, home-range estimates quantified using occurrence estimators are too small, and this problem is exacerbated by ongoing improvements in tracking technology that enable more frequent and more accurate data on animal movements. We encourage researchers to use range estimators to estimate the area of home ranges and occurrence estimators to answer other questions in movement ecology, such as when and where an animal crosses a linear feature, visits a location of interest, or interacts with other animals. Open Research StatementTracking data on Aepyceros melampus, Beatragus hunteri, Bycanistes bucinator, Cerdocyon thous, Eulemur rufifrons, Glyptemys insculpta, Gyps coprotheres, Madoqua guentheri, Ovis canadensis, Propithecus verreauxi, Sus scrofa, and Ursus arctos are publicly archived in the Dryad repository (Noonan et al. 2018; https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.v5051j2), as are data from Procapra gutturosa (Fleming et al. 2014a; https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.45157). Data on Panthera onca were taken from (Morato et al. 2018). Additional data are publicly archived in the Movebank repository under the following identifiers: Canis latrans, 8159699; Canis lupus, 8159399; Chrysocyon brachyurus, 18156143; Felis silvestris, 40386102; Gyps africanus, 2919708; Lepus europaeus, 25727477; Martes pennanti, 2964494; Panthera leo, 220229; Papio cynocephalus, 222027; Syncerus caffer, 1764627; Tapirus terrestris, 443607536; Torgos tracheliotus, 2919708; and Ursus americanus, 8170674.

ecology↗

A comprehensive framework for handling location error in animal tracking data

Animal tracking data are being collected more frequently, in greater detail, and on smaller taxa than ever before. These data hold the promise to increase the relevance of animal movement for understanding ecological processes, but this potential will only be fully realized if their accompanying location error is properly addressed. Historically, coarsely-sampled movement data have proved invaluable for understanding large scale processes (e.g., home range, habitat selection, etc.), but modern fine-scale data promise to unlock far more ecological information. While GPS location error can often be ignored in coarsely sampled data, fine-scale data require more care, and tools to do this have not kept pace. Current approaches to dealing with location error largely fall into two categories--either discarding the least accurate location estimates prior to analysis or simultaneously fitting movement and error parameters in a hidden-state model. In some cases these approaches can provide a level of correction, but they have known limitations, and in some cases they can be worse than doing nothing. Here, we provide a general framework to account for location error in the analysis of triangulated and trilatcralizcd animal tracking data, which includes GPS, Argos Doppler-shift, triangulated VHF, trilatcralized acoustic and cellular location data. We apply our error-modelselection framework to 190 GPS, cellular, and acoustic devices representing 27 models from 14 manufacturers. Collectively, these devices were used to track a wide range of taxa comprising birds, fish, reptiles, and mammals of different sizes and with different behaviors, in urban, suburban, and wild settings. In almost half of the tested device models, error-model selection was necessary to obtain the best performing error model, and in almost a quarter of tested device models, the reported DOP values were actually misinformative. Then, using empirical tracking data from multiple species, we provide an overview of modern, error-informed movement analyses, including continuous-time path reconstruction, home-range distribution, home-range overlap, speed, and distance estimation. Adding to these techniques, we introduce new error-informed estimators for outlier detection and autocorrelation visualization. Because error-induced biases depend on many factors--sampling schedule, movement characteristics, tracking device, habitat, etc.--differential bias can easily confound biological inference and lead researchers to draw false conclusions. We demonstrate how error-informed analyses on calibrated tracking data can provide more accurate estimates are that are insensitive to location error, and allow researchers to use all of their data.

ecology↗