Behavior-based scale definitions for determining individual space use: Requirements of two amphibians

American Naturalist

Volumn 173, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 60-71

  Indermaur, Lukas ^a,b   Gehring, Marianne ^a,b   Wehrle, Wendelin ^a,b   Tockner, Klement ^c,d   Naef Daenzer, Beat ^e  

^a SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF AQUATIC SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Switzerland)

^b ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^c LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE OF FRESHWATER ECOLOGY AND INLAND FISHERIES   (Germany)

^d FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

^e SWISS ORNITHOLOGICAL INSTITUTE   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Bufo; Floodplain mosaic; Foraging behavior; Habitat structure; Home range size; Path analysis

Indexed keywords

FLOODPLAIN; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; HABITAT STRUCTURE; HOME RANGE; LANDSCAPE; PATH ANALYSIS; SPACE USE; TOAD;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; ECOSYSTEM; POPULATION DENSITY; TELEMETRY; TEMPERATURE; TOAD;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; BUFO BUFO; ECOSYSTEM; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; POPULATION DENSITY; TELEMETRY; TEMPERATURE;

AMPHIBIA; ANURA; BUFO; BUFO BUFO; BUFO VIRIDIS;

EID: 58749083230     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/593355     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Arscott, D. B., K. Tockner, and J. V. Ward. 2001. Thermal heterogeneity along a braided floodplain river (Tagliamento River, northeast Italy). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58:2359-2373.
2. Arscott, D. B., K. Tockner, D. van der Nat, and J. V. Ward. 2002. Aquatic habitat dynamics along a braided alpine river ecosystem (Tagliamento River, northeast Italy). Ecosystems 5:802-814.
3. Arthur, S. M., B. F. J. Manly, L. L. McDonald, and G. W. Garner. 1996. Assessing habitat selection when availability changes. Ecology 77:215-227.
4. Berry, P. Y. 1970. The food of the giant toad Bufo asper. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 49:61-68.
5. Biedermann, R. 2003. Body size and area-incidence relationships: is there a general pattern? Global Ecology and Biogeography 12:381-387.
6. Börger, L., N. Franconi, F. Ferretti, F. Meschi, G. De Michele, A. Gantz, and T. Coulson. 2006b. An integrated approach to identify spatiotemporal and individual-level determinants of animal home range size. American Naturalist 168:471-485.
7. Buner, F., M. Jenny, N. Zbinden, and B. Naef-Daenzer. 2005. Ecologically enhanced areas: a key habitat structure for re-introduced grey partridges Perdix perdix. Biological Conservation 124:373-381.
8. Burnham, K. P., and D. R. Anderson. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. 2nd ed. Springer, New York.
9. Burt, W. H. 1943. Territoriality and home range concepts as applied to mammals. Journal of Mammalogy 24:346-352.
10. Clutton-Brock, T. H., F. Guiness, and S. D. Albon. 1982. Red deer: behaviour and ecology of two sexes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
11. Connell, J. H. 1979. Intermediate-disturbance hypothesis. Science 204:1344-1345.
12. Dahle, B., and J. E. Swenson. 2003. Home ranges in adult Scandinavian brown bears (Ursus arctos): effect of mass, sex, reproductive category, population density and habitat type. Journal of Zoology (London) 260:329-335.
13. Degani, G., N. Silanikove, and A. Shkolnik. 1984. Adaptation of green toad (Bufo viridis) to terrestrial life by urea accumulation. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 77:585-587.
14. Ebersole, J. P. 1980. Food density and territory size: an alternative model and a test on the reef fish Eupomacentrus leucostictus. American Naturalist 115:492-509.
15. Ferguson, S. H., M. K. Taylor, E. W. Born, A. Rosing-Asvid, and F. Messier. 1999. Determinants of home range size for polar bears (Ursus maritimus). Ecology Letters 2:311-318.
16. Forester, D. C., J. W. Snodgrass, K. Marsalek, and Z. Lanham. 2006. Post-breeding dispersal and summer home range of female American toads (Bufo americanus). Northeastern Naturalist 13:59-72.
17. Giacoma, C., and S. Castellano. 2006. Bufo bufo and Bufo viridis. Pages 302-311 in R. Sindaco, G. Doria, E. Razzetti, and F. Bernini, eds. Atlas of Italian amphibians and reptiles. Societas Herpetologica Italica, Edizione Polistampa, Firenze.
18. Hamel, S., and S. D. Cote. 2007. Habitat use patterns in relation to escape terrain: are alpine ungulate females trading off better foraging sites for safety? Canadian Journal of Zoology 85:933-943.
19. Hayne, D. W. 1949. Calculation of size of home range. Journal of Mammalogy 30:1-18.
20. Hixon, M. A. 1980. Food production and competitor density as determinants of feeding territory size. American Naturalist 115:510-530.
21. Hoffman, J., and U. Katz. 1989. The ecological significance of burrowing behavior in the toad (Bufo viridis). Oecologia (Berlin) 81:510-513.
22. Indermaur, L., B. R. Schmidt, and K. Tockner. 2008. Effect of transmitter mass and tracking duration on body mass change of two anuran species. Amphibia-Reptilia 29:263-269.
23. Inger, R. F. 1969. Organization of communities of frogs along small rain forest streams in Sarawak. Journal of Animal Ecology 38:123-148.
24. Jöreskog, K. G., and D. Sörbom. 1984. Advances in factor analysis and structural equation models. Rowman and Littlefield, Plymouth.
25. Kenward, R. E. 1985. Ranging behaviour and population dynamics in grey squirrels. Pages 319-330 in R. M. Silbly and R. H. Smith, eds. Behavioral ecology: ecological consequences of adaptive behaviour. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.
26. -. 2001. A manual for wildlife radio tagging. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
27. Kie, J. G., R. T. Bowyer, M. C. Nicholson, B. B. Boroski, and E. R. Loft. 2002. Landscape heterogeneity at differing scales: effects on spatial distribution of mule deer. Ecology 83:530-544.
28. Kjellander, P., A. J. M. Hewison, O. Liberg, J. M. Angibault, E. Bideau, and B. Cargnelutti. 2004. Experimental evidence for density-dependence of home range size in roe deer (Capreolus capreolus L.): a comparison of two long-term studies. Oecologia (Berlin) 139:478-485.
29. Klopfer, P. H., and R. H. MacArthur. 1960. Niche size and faunal diversity. American Naturalist 94:293-300.
30. Lagos, V. O., L. C. Contreras, P. L. Meserve, J. R. Gutierrez, and F. M. Jaksic. 1995. Effects of predation risk on space use by small mammals: a field experiment with a Neotropical rodent. Oikos 74:259-264.
31. Lima, S. L., and L. M. Dill. 1990. Behavioural decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Canadian Journal of Zoology 68:619-640.
32. Lombardi, L., N. Fernandez, and S. Moreno. 2007. Habitat use and spatial behaviour in the European rabbit in three Mediterranean environments. Basic and Applied Ecology 8:453-463.
33. Lomnicki, A. 1988. Population ecology of individuals. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
34. Macdonald, D. W. 1983. The ecology of carnivore social behaviour. Nature 301:379-384.
35. Marzluff, J. M., S. T. Knick, and J. J. Millspaugh. 2001. High-tech behavioral ecology: modeling the distribution of animal activities to better understand wildlife space use and resource selection. Pages 309-326 in J. J. Millspaugh and J. M. Marzluff, eds. Radiotracking and animal populations. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
36. McLoughlin, P. D., H. D. Cluff, R. J. Gau, R. Mulders, R. L. Case, and F. Messier. 2003. Effect of spatial differences in habitat on home ranges of grizzly bears. Ecoscience 10:11-16.
37. McNab, B. K. 1963. Bioenergetics and determination of home range size. American Naturalist 97:133-140.
38. Meek, R., and E. Jolley. 2006. Body temperatures of the common toad, Bufo bufo, in the Vendee, France. Herpetological Bulletin 95:21-24.
39. Mitchell, R. J. 1993. Path analysis: pollination. Pages 211-231 in M. S. Scheiner and J. Gurevitch, eds. Design and analysis of ecological experiments. Chapman & Hall, New York.
40. Morales, J. M., and S. P. Ellner. 2002. Scaling up animal movements in heterogeneous landscapes: the importance of behavior. Ecology 83:2240-2247.
41. Naiman, R. J., H. Décamps, and M. E. McClain. 2005. Riparia: ecology, conservation and management of streamside communities. Elsevier Academic, Burlington, MA.
42. Pasinelli, G. 2000. Oaks (Quercus sp.) and only oaks? relations between habitat structure and home range size of the middle spotted woodpecker (Dendrocopos medius). Biological Conservation 93:227-235.
43. Petts, G. E., A. M. Gurnell, A. J. Gerrard, D. M. Hannah, B. Hansford, I. Morrissey, P. J. Edwards, et al. 2000. Longitudinal variations in exposed riverine sediments: a context for the ecology of the Fiume Tagliamento, Italy. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 10:249-266.
44. Powell, R. A. 2000. Animal home ranges and territories and home range estimators. Pages 65-110 in L. Boitani and T. K. Fuller, eds. Research techniques in animal ecology: controversies and consequencies. Columbia University Press, New York.
45. Prohl, H., and O. Berke. 2001. Spatial distributions of male and female strawberry poison frogs and their relation to female reproductive resources. Oecologia (Berlin) 129:534-542.
46. Rathbun, G. B., and T. G. Murphey. 1996. Evaluation of a radio-belt for ranid frogs. Herpetological Review 27:187-189.
47. Relyea, R. A., R. K. Lawrence, and S. Demarais. 2000. Home range of desert mule deer: testing the body-size and habitat-productivity hypotheses. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:146-153.
48. Revilla, E., T. Wiegand, F. Palomares, P. Ferreras, and M. Delibes. 2004. Effects of matrix heterogeneity on animal dispersal: from individual behavior to metapopulation-level parameters. American Naturalist 164:130-153.
49. Richards, S. J., U. Sinsch, and R. A. Alford. 1994. Radio tracking. Pages 155-157 in W. R. Heyer, M. A. Donnelly, R. W. McDiarmid, L. C. Hayek, and M. S. Foster, eds. Measuring and monitoring biological diversity: standard methods for amphibians. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
50. Rittenhouse, T. A. G., and R. D. Semlitsch. 2007. Distribution of amphibians in terrestrial habitat surrounding wetlands. Wetlands 27:153-161.
51. Rosalino, L. M., D. W. Macdonald, and M. Santos-Reis. 2004. Spatial structure and land-cover use in a low-density Mediterranean population of Eurasian badgers. Canadian Journal of Zoology 82:1493-1502.
52. Said, S., and S. Servanty. 2005. The influence of landscape structure on female roe deer home range size. Landscape Ecology 20:1003-1012.
53. Schoener, T. W. 1968. Sizes of feeding territories among birds. Ecology 49:123-141.
54. Schwarzkopf, L., and R. A. Alford. 1996. Desiccation and shelter-site use in a tropical amphibian: comparing toads with physical models. Functional Ecology 10:193-200.
55. Seebacher, F., and R. A. Alford. 2002. Shelter microhabitats determine body temperature and dehydration rates of a terrestrial amphibian (Bufo marinus). Journal of Herpetology 36:69-75.
56. Semlitsch, R. D. 1981. Terrestrial activity and summer home range of the mole salamander (Ambystoma talpoideum). Canadian Journal of Zoology 59:315-322.
57. Smith, C. C., and A. N. Bragg. 1949. Observations on the ecology and natural history of Anura. VII. Food and feeding habits of the common species of toads in Oklahoma. Ecology 30:333-349.
58. South, A. B., R. E. Kenward, and S. S. Walls. 2005. Ranges 7 v1: for the analysis of tracking and location data. Online manual. Anatrack, Wareham, UK.
59. Steury, T. D., and D. L. Murray. 2003. Causes and consequences of individual variation in territory size in the American red squirrel. Oikos 101:147-156.
60. Tockner, K., J. V. Ward, D. B. Arscott, P. J. Edwards, J. Kollmann, A. M. Gurnell, G. E. Petts, and B. Maiolini. 2003. The Tagliamento River: a model ecosystem of European importance. Aquatic Sciences 65:239-253.
61. Tockner, K., I. Klaus, C. Baumgartner, and J. V. Ward. 2006. Amphibian diversity and nestedness in a dynamic floodplain river (Tagliamento, NE Italy). Hydrobiologia 565:121-133.
62. Trenham, P. C., and H. B. Shaffer. 2005. Amphibian upland habitat use and its consequences for population viability. Ecological Applications 15:1158-1168.
63. Tufto, J., R. Andersen, and J. Linnell. 1996. Habitat use and ecological correlates of home range size in a small cervid: the roe deer. Journal of Animal Ecology 65:715-724.
64. Wälti, M. O., and H. U. Reyer. 2007. Food supply modifies the trade-off between past and future reproduction in a sexual parasite-host system (Rana esculenta, Rana lessonae). Oecologia (Berlin) 152:415-424.
65. Wang, M., and V. Grimm. 2007. Home range dynamics and population regulation: an individual-based model of the common shrew Sorex ayaneus. Ecological Modelling 205:397-409.
66. Ward, J. V., K. Tockner, P. J. Edwards, J. Kollmann, G. Bretschko, A. M. Gurnell, G. E. Petts, and B. Rosaro. 1999. A reference river system for the Alps: the "Fiume Tagliamento." Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 15:63-75.
67. Worton, B. J. 1989. Kernel methods for estimating the utilisation distribution in home range studies. Ecology 70:164-168.