Effects of spatiotemporal scale on autocorrelation and home range estimators

Journal of Wildlife Management

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 280-290

  Hansteen, Thomas L ^a   Andreassen, Harry P ^a   Ims, Rolf A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

Autocorrelation; Home range; Kernel estimator; Microtus oeconomus; Minimum convex polygon; Multiple polygons by clustering; Norway; Radiotelemetry; Root vole; Schoener's ratio

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; MICROTUS OECONOMUS; MURIDAE;

AUTOCORRELATION; HOME RANGE; KERNEL ESTIMATOR; MINIMUM CONVEX POLYGON; MULTIPLE POLYGONS BY CLUSTERING;

EID: 0030812085     PISSN: 0022541X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3802583     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. AARS, J., H. P. ANDREASSEN, AND R. A. IMS. 1995. Root vole: litter sex ratio variation in fragmented habitat. J. Anim. Ecol. 64:459-472.
2. AMBROSE, H. W. 1973. An experimental study of some factors affecting the spatial and temporal activity of Microtus pennsylvanicus. J. Mammal. 54:79-110.
3. ANDREASSEN, H. P., R. A. IMS, N. C. STENSETH, AND N. G. YOCCOZ. 1993. Investigating space use by means of radiotelemetry and other methods: a methodological guide. Pages 589-618 in N. C. Stenseth and R. A. Ims, eds. The biology of the lemmings. Acad. Press, London, U.K.
4. ATTUQUAYEFIO, D. K., M. L. GORMAN, AND R. J. WOLTON. 1986. Home range sizes in the wood mouse Apodemus sylvaticus: habitat, sex and seasonal differences. J. Zool. (Lond.) 210:45-53.
5. BELL, W. J. 1991. Searching behaviour. Chapman and Hall, London, U.K. 358 pp.
6. BONDRUP-NIELSEN, S., AND R. A. IMS. 1990. Reversed sexual dimorphism in microtines: are females larger than males or are males smaller than females. Evol. Ecol. 4:261-272.
7. BOULANGER, J. G., AND G. C. WHITE. 1990. A comparison of home-range estimators using Monte Carlo simulations. J. Wildl. Manage. 54:310-315.
8. BURNHAM, K. P., AND D. R. ANDERSON. 1992. Data based selection of appropriate biological models: the key to modern data analysis. Pages 16-30 in D. R. McCullough and R. H. Barrett, eds. Wildlife 2001: populations. Elsevier Appl. Sci., London, U.K.
9. BURT, W. H. 1943. Territoriality and home range concepts as applied to mammals. J. Mammal. 24:346-352.
10. DALKE, P. D., AND P. R. SIME. 1938. Home and seasonal ranges of the eastern cottontail in Connecticut. Trans. North Am. Wildl. Conf. 3:659-669.
11. DAY, R. W., AND G. P. QUINN. 1989. Comparisons of treatments after an analysis of variance in ecology. Ecol. Monogr. 59:433-463.
12. DIXON, K. R., AND J. A. CHAPMAN. 1980. Harmonic mean measure of animal activity areas. Ecology 61:1040-1044.
13. FOWLER, J., AND L. COHEN. 1990. Practical statistics for field biologists. Open Univ. Press, Philadelphia, Pa. 227pp.
14. GESE, E. M., D. E. ANDERSEN, AND O. J. RONGSTAD. 1990. Determining home range size of resident coyotes from point and sequential locations. J. Wildl. Manage. 54:501-506.
15. HALLE, S. 1995. Diel patterns of locomotory activity in root vole, Microtus oeconomus, populations. J. Biol. Rhythms 10:211-224.
16. HARRIS, S., W. J. CRESSWELL, G. P. FORDE, W. J. TREWHELLA, T. WOOLLARD, AND S. WRAY. 1990. Home range analysis using radio-tracking data - a review of problems and techniques particularly as applied to the study of mammals. Mammal Rev. 20:97-123.
17. IMS, R. A. 1989. Kinship and origin effects of dispersal and space sharing in Clethrionomys rufocanus. Ecology 70:607-616.
18. _. 1995. Movement patterns related to spatial structures. Pages 85-109 in L. Hansson, L. Fahrig, and G. Merriam, eds. Mosaic landscapes and ecological processes. Chapman and Hall, London, U.K.
19. _, J. ROLSTAD, AND P. WEGGE. 1993. Predicting space use responses to habitat fragmentation: can voles Microtus oeconomus serve as an experimental model system (EMS) for capercaillie grouse Tetrao urogallus in boreal forest? Biol. Conserv. 63:1-8.
20. JEWELL, P. A. 1966. The concept of home range in mammals. Symp. Zool. Soc. London. 18:85-109.
21. JOHANNESEN, E., H. P. ANDREASSEN, AND H. STEEN. 1997. Effect of radio collars on survival of root voles. J. Mammal. 78. In Press.
22. KENWARD, R. 1987. Wildlife radio-tagging. Equipment, field techniques and data analysis. Acad. Press, London, U.K. 222 pp.
23. LAMBIN, X., C. J. KREBS, AND B. SCOTT. 1992. Spacing system of the tundra vole (Microtus oeconomus) during the breeding season in Canada's western Arctic. Can. J. Zool. 70:2068-2072.
24. LEGENDRE, P. 1993. Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm. Ecology 74:1659-1673.
25. MCNAY, J., A. MORGAN, AND F. L. BUNNELL. 1994. Characterizing independence of observations in the movement of Colombian black-tailed deer. J. Wildl. Manage. 58:422-429.
26. MOHR, C. O. 1947. Table of equivalent populations of north American small mammals. Am. Midl. Nat. 37:223-249.
27. OSTFELD, R. S. 1986. Territoriality and mating system of California voles. J. Anim. Ecol. 55:691-706.
28. REYNOLDS, T. D., AND J. W. LAUNDRE. 1990. Time intervals for estimating pronghorn and coyote home ranges and daily movements. J. Wildl. Manage. 54:316-322.
29. SALTZ, D., AND G. C. WHITE. 1990. Comparison of different measures of error in simulated radiotelemetry locations. J. Wildl. Manage. 54:169-174.
30. SAMUEL, M. D., D. J. PIERCE, AND E. O. GARTON. 1985. Identifying areas of concentrated use within the home range. J. Anim. Ecol. 54:711-719.
31. SAS INSTITUTE INC. 1992. SAS technical rep. P-229. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, N.C. 620 pp.
32. SCHOENER, T. W. 1981. An empirically based estimate of home range. Theor. Pop. Biol. 20:281-325.
33. SHAPIRO, S. S., AND M. B. WILK. 1965. An analysis of variance test for normality. Biometrika 52:591-611.
34. SPENCER, W. D., AND R. H. BARRETT. 1984. An evaluation of the harmonic mean measure for defining carnivore activity areas. Acta Zool. Fenn. 171:255-259.
35. STICKEL, L. F. 1954. A comparison of certain methods of measuring ranges of small mammals. J. Mammal. 35:1-15.
36. SWIHART, R. K., AND N. A. SLADE. 1985a. Testing for independence of observations in animal movements. Ecology 66:1176-1184.
37. _, AND _. 1985b. Influence of sampling interval on estimates of home range size. J. Widl. Manage. 49:1019-1025.
38. _, AND _. 1986. The importance of statistical power when testing for independence in animal movements. Ecology 67:255-258.
39. VON ENDE, C. N. 1993. Repeated measures analysis: growth and other time-dependent measures. Pages 113-137 in S. M. Scheiner, and J. Gurevitch, eds. Design and analysis of ecological experiments. Chapman and Hall, London, U.K.
40. WHITE, G. C., AND R. A. GARROTT. 1990. Analysis of wildlife radio tracking data. Acad. Press, New York, N.Y. 383pp.
41. WIENS, J. A. 1989. Spatial scaling in ecology. Functional Ecol. 3:385-397.
42. WORTON, B. J. 1987. A review of models of home range for animal movement. Ecol. Model. 38:277-298.
43. _. 1989. Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home range studies. Ecology 70:164-168.
44. ZIMMERMAN, J. W., AND R. A. POWELL. 1995. Radiotelemetry error: location error method compared with error polygons and confidence ellipses. Can. J. Zool. 73:1123-1133.