Accuracy of home range estimators for homogeneous and inhomogeneous point patterns

Ecological Modelling

Volumn 225, Issue , 2012, Pages 66-73

  Downs, Joni A ^a   Heller, Justin H ^a   Loraamm, Rebecca ^a   Stein, Dana Oppenheim ^a   McDaniel, Cassandra ^a   Onorato, Dave ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^b FISH AND WILDLIFE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Characteristic shapes; Home range analysis; Kernel density estimation; LoCoH

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE KERNELS; ANIMAL TRACKING; CHARACTERISTIC SHAPES; CONVEX HULL; FLORIDA; HOME RANGE; HOMOGENEOUS SAMPLES; INHOMOGENEITIES; KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATION; LOCOH; NEAREST NEIGHBORS; NON-STATIONARITIES; NOVEL TECHNIQUES; POINT PATTERNS; RANDOM SAMPLE; SAMPLE POINT; SAMPLE SIZES; SIMULATED DISTRIBUTION; UNBIASED ESTIMATES;

ANIMALS;

ESTIMATION;

DATABASE; FELID; HOME RANGE; HOMOGENEITY; INHOMOGENEITY; NEAREST NEIGHBOR ANALYSIS; SAMPLING;

ANIMALIA; CHANDIPURA VIRUS; PUMA CONCOLOR CORYI;

EID: 83155163870     PISSN: 03043800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.11.010     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Aebischer N.J., Robertson P.A., Kenward R.E. Compositional analysis of habitat use from animal radio-tracking data. Ecology 1993, 74:1313-1325.
2. Baddeley A., Turner R. Spatstat: an R package for analyzing spatial point patterns. Journal of Statistical Software 2005, 12(6):1-42.
3. Bailey T.C., Gatrell A.C. Interactive Spatial Data Analysis 1995, Longman, Harlow.
4. Barry R.P., McIntyre J. Estimating animal densities and home range in regions with irregular boundaries and holes: a lattice-based alternative to the kernel density estimator. Ecological Modelling 2011, 222(10):1666-1672.
5. Blundell G.M., Maier J.A.K., Debevec E.M. Linear home ranges: effects of smoothing, sample size, and autocorrelation on kernel estimates. Ecological Monographs 2001, 71:469-489.
6. Börger L., Franconi N., et al. Effects of sampling regime on the mean and variance of home range size estimates. Journal of Animal Ecology 2006, 75(6):1393-1405.
7. Calenge C. The package adehabitat for the R software: a tool for the analysis of space and habitat use by animals. Ecological Modelling 2006, 197:516-519.
8. Cox D.R., Isham V. Point Processes 1980, Chapman & Hall, New York, 188 p.
9. Cressie N.A.C. Statistics for Spatial Data 1993, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
10. Daley D.J., Vere-Jones D. An Introduction to the Theory of Point Processes 1988, Springer, New York.
11. De Solla S.R., Bonduriansky R., Brooks R.J. Eliminating autocorrelation reduces biological relevance of home range estimates. Journal of Animal Ecology 1999, 68:221-234.
12. Downs J.A., Gates R.J., Murray A.T. Estimating carrying capacity for sandhill cranes using habitat suitability and spatial optimization models. Ecological Modelling 2008, 214:284-292.
13. Downs J.A., Horner M.W. Effects of point pattern shape on home-range estimates. Journal of Wildlife Management 2008, 72:1813-1818.
14. Downs J.A., Horner M.W. A characteristic-hull based method for home range estimation. Transactions in GIS 2009, 13:527-537.
15. Downs J.A., Horner M.W., Tucker A. Time-geographic density estimation for home range analysis. Annals of GIS 2011, 17:163-171.
16. Duckham M., Kulik L., Worboys M., Galton A. Efficient generation of simple polygons for characterizing the shape of a set of points in the plane. Pattern Recognition 2008, 41:3224-3236.
17. Fagan W.F., Lutscher F. Average dispersal success: linking home range, dispersal, and metapopulation dynamics to reserve design. Ecological Applications 2006, 16:820-828.
18. Fieberg J. Kernel density estimators of home range: smoothing and the autocorrelation red herring. Ecology 2007, 88:1059-1066.
19. Fieberg J., Kochanny C.O. Quantifying home-range overlap: the importance of the utilization distribution. Journal of Wildlife Management 2005, 69:1346-1359.
20. Fotheringham A.S. Trends in quantitative methods. 1. Stressing the local. Progress in Human Geography 1997, 21:88-96.
21. Fotheringham A.S., Brunsdon C., Charlton M. Quantitative Geography: Perspectives on Spatial Data Analysis 2000, Sage Publications, London/Thousand Oaks, CA, xii, 270 p.
22. FWC Annual Report on the Research and Management of Florida Panthers: 2008-2009 2009, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute & Division of Habitat and Species Conservation; Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Naples, FL, USA.
23. Getz W.M., Wilmers C.C. A local nearest-neighbor convex-hull construction of home ranges and utilization distributions. Ecography 2004, 27:489-505.
24. Getz W.M., Fortmann-Roe S., Cross P.C., Lyons A.J., Ryan S.J., Wilmers C.C. LoCoH: nonparameteric kernel methods for constructing home ranges and utilization distributions. PLoS One 2007, 2:11.
25. Girard I., Ouellet J.P., Courtois R., Dussault C., Breton L. Effects of sampling effort based on GPS telemetry on home-range size estimations. Journal of Wildlife Management 2002, 66:1290-1300.
26. Gitzen R.A., Millspaugh J.J. Comparison of least-squares cross-validation bandwidth options for kernel home-range estimation. Wildlife Society Bulletin 2003, 31:823-831.
27. Gitzen R.A., Millspaugh J.J., Kernohan B.J. Bandwidth selection for fixed-kernel analysis of animal utilization distributions. Journal of Wildlife Management 2006, 70:1334-1344.
28. Hart J.D. Efficiency of a kernel density estimator under an autoregressive dependence model. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1984, 79:110-117.
29. Hemson G., Johnson P., South A., Kenward R., Ripley R., Macdonald D. Are kernels the mustard? Data from global positioning system (GPS) collars suggests problems for kernel home-range analyses with least-squares cross-validation. Journal of Animal Ecology 2005, 74:455-463.
30. Horne J.S., Garton E.O., Krone S.M., Lewis J.S. Analyzing animal movements using Brownian bridges. Ecology 2007, 88:2354-2363.
31. Jacobsen M. Point Process Theory and Applications: Marked Point and Piecewise Deterministic Processes (Probability and its Applications) 2006, Birkhauser, Boston.
32. Karr A.F. Point Processes and Their Statistical Inference 1991, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 490 p.
33. Katajisto J., Moilanen A. Kernel-based home range method for data with irregular sampling intervals. Ecological Modelling 2006, 194:405-413.
34. Kernohan B.J., Gitzen R.A., Millspaugh J.J. Analysis of Animal Space Use and Movements 2001, Academic Press, San Diego.
35. Kutoyants Y.A. Statistical Inference for Spatial Poisson Processes 1998, Springer, New York.
36. Land E.D., Shindle D.B., Kawula R.J., Benson J.F., Lotz M.A., Onorato D.P. Florida panther habitat selection analysis of concurrent GPS and VHF telemetry data. Journal of Wildlife Management 2008, 72:633-639.
37. Lindberg M.S., Walker J. Satellite telemetry in avian research and management: sample size considerations. Journal of Wildlife Management 2007, 71:1002-1009.
38. Millspaugh J.S.J., Gitzen R.A., Kernohan B.J., Larson J.A., Clay C.L. Comparability of three analytical techniques to assess joint space use. Wildlife Society Bulletin 2004, 32:148-157.
39. Mitchell M.S., Powell R.A. Optimal use of resources structures home ranges and spatial distribution of black bears. Animal Behaviour 2007, 74:219-230.
40. Mitchell M.S., Powell R.A. Estimated home ranges can misrepresent habitat relationships on patchy landscapes. Ecological Modelling 2008, 216:409-414.
41. Moffitt E.A., Botsford L.W., Kaplan D.M., O'Farrell M.R. Marine reserve networks for species that move within a home range. Ecological Applications 2009, 19:1835-1847.
42. Moller J., Waagepeterson R.P. Statistical Inference and Simulation for Spatial Point Processes 2003, Chapman & Hall, New York, 300 p.
43. NPS Florida Panther Research and Monitoring in Big Cypress National Preserve: 2008-2009 Annual Report 2009, U.S. National Park Service, Big Cypress National Preserve, Ochopee, FL, USA.
44. Okabe A. Spatial Tessellations: Concepts and Applications of Voronoi Diagrams 1992, Chichester, Wiley.
45. Ogata Y., Tanemura M. Likelihood estimation of interaction potentials and external fields of inhomogeneous spatial point patterns. Proceedings of Pacific Statistical Congress 1986, 150-154. North-Holland, Amsterdam. I.S. Francis, B.F.J. Manly, F.C. Lam (Eds.).
46. Rayfield B., Moilanen A., Fortin M.J. Incorporating consumer-resource spatial interactions in reserve design. Ecological Modelling 2009, 220:725-733.
47. Ripley B.D. Spatial Statistics 1981, J. Wiley & Sons, New York, 252 p.
48. Rodgers A.R., Carr A.P., Beyer H.L., Smith L., Kie J.G. HRT: Home Range Tools for ArcGIS. Version 1.1 2007, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Centre for Northern Forest Ecosystem Research, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada.
49. Row J.R., Blouin-Demers G. Kernels are not accurate estimators of home-range size for herpetofauna. Copeia 2006, 4:797-802.
50. Sain S.R., Baggerly K.A., Scott D.W. Cross-validation of multivariate densities. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1994, 89:807-817.
51. Silverman B.W. Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis 1986, Chapman Hall, London.
52. Sköld M., Hössjer O. On the asymptotic variance of the continuous-time kernel density estimator. Statistics & Probability Letters 1999, 44:97-106.
53. Snyder D.L. Random Point Processes 1975, Wiley, New York.
54. Snyder D.L., Miller M.I. Random Point Processes in Time and Space 1991, Springer-Verlag, New York.
55. Steury T.D., McCarthy J.E., Roth T.C., Lima S.L., Murray D.L. Evaluation of root-n bandwidth selectors for kernel density estimation. Journal of Wildlife Management 2010, 74:539-548.
56. Swihart R.K., Slade N.A. Influence of sampling interval on estimates of home-range size. Journal of Wildlife Management 1985, 49:1019-1025.
57. Thorisson H. Coupling, Stationarity, and Regeneration 2000, Springer, New York, 536 p.
58. Wand M.P., Jones M.C. Kernel Smoothing 1995, Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
59. White G.C., Garrott R.A. Analysis of Wildlife Radio-Tracking Data 1990, Academic Press, San Diego.