Effects of sampling effort based on GPS telemetry on home-range size estimations

Journal of Wildlife Management

Volumn 66, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 1290-1300

  Girard, Irene ^a   Ouellet, Jean Pierre ^a   Courtois, Réhaume ^b   Dussault, Christian ^c   Breton, Laurier ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC À RIMOUSKI   (Canada)

^b Societe dela Faune des Parcs Quebec   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Alces alces; Bias; Clusters; Convex polygons; Fixed kernels; Global Positioning System; Home range; Moose; Power analysis; Radiotelemetry

Indexed keywords

ESTIMATION METHOD; HOME RANGE; RANGE SIZE; SAMPLING; TELEMETRY; UNGULATE;

ALCES ALCES; ANIMALIA; UNGULATA;

EID: 0036816394     PISSN: 0022541X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3802962     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Aebischer, N. J., P. A. Robertson, and R. E. Kenward. 1993. Compositional analysis of habitat use from animal radio-tracking data. Ecology 74:1313-1325.
2. Anderson, D. J. 1982. The home range: A new nonparametric estimation technique. Ecology 63:103-112.
3. Boulanger, J. G., and G. C. White. 1990. A comparison of home-range estimators using Monte Carlo simulation. Journal of Wildlife Management 54:310-315.
4. Canadian Council on Animal Care. 1984. Guide to the care and use of experimental animals. Volume 2. Canadian Council on Animal Care, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
5. Chekchak, T., R. Courtois, J.-P. Ouellet, L. Breton, and S. St-Onge. 1998. Caractéristiques des sites de mise bas de l'orignal (Alces alces). Canadian Journal of Zoology 76:1663-1670. [In French.]
6. Courtois, R. 1993. Description d'Un Indice de Qualité d'Habitat Pour l'Orignal (Alces alces) au Québec. Document Technique 93/1, Ministère du Loisir, de la Chasse et de la Pêche, Direction générale de la ressource faunique, Gestion intégrés des ressources. [In French.]
7. De Solla, S. R., R. Bonduriansky, and R. J. Brooks. 1999. Eliminating autocorrelation reduces biological relevance of home range estimates. Journal of Animal Ecology 68:221-234.
8. Dixon, K. R., and J. A. Chapman. 1980. Harmonic mean measure of animal activity areas. Ecology 61:1040-1044.
9. Dussault, C., R. Courtois, J.-P. Ouellet, and J. Huot. 2000. Evaluation of GPS telemetry collar performance for habitat studies. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27:965-972.
10. _, _, _, and _. 2001. Influence of differential correction and satellite geometry on GPS locations accuracy. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29:171-179.
11. _, and J. Huot. 1999. Some considerations concerning female moose calls during the rutting period. Alces 35:159-164.
12. Gerrodette, T. 1987. A power analysis for detecting trends. Ecology 68:1364-1372.
13. Hansteen, T. L., H. P. Andreassen, and R. A. Ims. 1997. Effects of spatiotemporal scale on autocorrelation and home range estimators. Journal of Wildlife Management 61:280-290.
14. Harris, S., W. J. Cresswell, P. G. 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 Review 20:97-123.
15. Hayne, D. W. 1949. Calculation of size of home range. Journal of Mammalogy 30:1-18.
16. Hintze, J. 1996. PASS 6.0: Power analysis and sample size for Windows. NCSS Software, Kaysville, Utah, USA.
17. Janeau, G., J. M. Angibault, B. Cargnelutto, J. Joachim, D. Pépin, and F. Spitz. 1998. Le Global Positioning System (GPS) et son utilisation (en mode différentiel) chez les grands mammifères: Principes, précision, limites, contraintes et perspectives. Actes du Colloque Francophone de Mammalogie 21 (Amiens, 1997). Arvicola (No spécial):19-24. [In French.]
18. Johnson, D. H. 1980. The comparison of usage and availability measurements for evaluating resource preference. Ecology 61:65-71.
19. Kenward, R. E. 1987. Wildlife Radio Tagging: Equipment, Field Techniques and Data Analysis. Academic Press, London, United Kingdom.
20. _. 2001. A Manual for Wildlife Radio Tagging. Revised Edition. Academic Press, London, United Kingdom.
21. _, and K. H. Hodder. 1996. RANGES V: An Analysis System for Biological Location Data. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Dorset, United Kingdom.
22. Laurian, C., J.-P. Ouellet, R. Courtois, L. Breton, and S. St-Onge. 2000. Effects of intensive harvesting on moose reproduction. Journal of Applied Ecology 37:515-531.
23. Leptich, D. J., and J. R. Gilbert. 1989. Summer home range and habitat use by moose in northern Maine. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:880-885.
24. McLoughlin, P. D., and S. H. Ferguson. 2000. A hierarchical pattern of limiting factors helps explain variation in home range size. Ecoscience 7:123-130.
25. Moen, R., J. Pastor, and Y. Cohen. 1997. Accuracy of GPS telemetry collar locations with differential correction. Journal of Wildlife Management 61:530-539.
26. Mohr, C. O. 1947. Table of equivalent populations of North American small mammals. American Midland Naturalist 37:223-249.
27. Moorcroft P. R., M. A. Lewis, and R. L. Crabtree. 1999. Home range analysis using a mechanistic home range model. Ecology 80:1656-1665.
28. Otis, D. L., and G. C. White. 1999. Autocorrelation of location estimates and the analysis of radiotracking data. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:1039-1044.
29. Peterman, R. M. 1989. Statistical power analysis can improve fisheries research and management. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 47:2-15.
30. Powell, R. A. 2000. Animal home ranges and territories and home range estimators. Pages 65-110 in L. Boitoni and T. K. Fuller, editors. Research Techniques in Animal Ecology: Controversies and Consequences. Columbia University Press, New York, USA.
31. Regelin, W. L., C. C. Schwartz, and A. W. Franzmann. 1987. Effects of forest succession on nutritional dynamics of moose forage. Viltrevy [Swedish Wildlife Research] (Supplement) 1:247-253.
32. Rempel, R. S., and A. R. Rodgers. 1997. Effects of differential correction on accuracy of a GPS animal location system. Journal of Wildlife Management 61:525-530.
33. Reynolds, T. D., and J. w. Laundré. 1990. Time intervals for estimating pronghorn and coyote home ranges and daily movements. Journal of Wildlife Management 54:316-322.
34. Rodgers, A. R., R. S. Rempel, and K. F. Abraham. 1996. A GPS-based telemetry system. Wildlife Society Bulletin 24:559-566.
35. Sanderson, G. C. 1966. The study of mammal movements: A review. Journal of Wildlife Management 30:215-235.
36. Seaman, D. E., J. J. Millspaugh, B. J. Kernohan, G. C. Brundige, K. J. Raedeke, and R. A. Gitzen. 1999. Effects of sample size on kernel home range estimates. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:739-747.
37. _, and R. A. Powell. 1996. An evaluation of the accuracy of kernel density estimators for home range analysis. Ecology 77:2075-2085.
38. SPSS. 2000. SYSTAT. Version 10 for Windows. SPSS, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
39. Swihart, R. K., and N. A. Slade. 1985a. Influence of sampling interval on estimates of home-range size. Journal of Wildlife Management 49:1019-1025.
40. _, and _. 1985b. Testing for Independence of Observations in Animal Movements. Ecology 66:1176-1184.
41. _, and _. 1986. The importance of statistical power when testing for independence in animal movements. Ecology 67:255-258.
42. Van Winkle, W. 1975. Comparison of several probabilistic home-range models. Journal of Wildlife Management 39:118-123.
43. Voigt, D. R., and R. R. Tinline. 1980. Strategies for analyzing radio tracking data. Pages 387-404 in C. J. Amlaner, Jr. and D. W. Macdonald, editors. A Handbook on Biotelemetry and Radio Tracking. Pergamon Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
44. White, G. C., and R. A. Garrott. 1990. Analysis of Wildlife Radio-tracking Data. Academic Press, London, United Kingdom.
45. Worton, B. J. 1987. A review of models of home range for animal movement. Ecological Modelling 38:277-298.
46. _. 1989. Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home-range studies. Ecology 70:164-168.
47. _. 1995. Using Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate kernel-based home range estimators. Journal of Wildlife Management 59:794-800.