Toward an ecological synthesis: a case for habitat selection

By D. Morris. Oecologia, 2003

828 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/154d33a6e456b4cb3abf685e8b6da9d0e20e9787

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Genetics

Citations in the corpus

A comprehensive framework for global patterns in biodiversity (2004, background): “Spatial considerations now play a prominent role in the development of theory concerning the outcome of interactions between species and the maintenance of community stability (Chesson 2000; Shurin & Allen 2001; Holt 2003; Morris 2003).”
The attraction of the known: the importance of spatial familiarity in habitat selection in wapiti Cervus elaphus (2009, background): “In the majority of habitat selection studies, the primary focus has been on defining the characteristics of the animal’s environment, and the animals’ response to those characteristics (Sva ¨rdson 1949, Fretwell and Lucas 1969, Jones 2001, Manly et al. 2002, Morris 2003 ).”
Establishing the link between habitat selection and animal population dynamics (2015, background): “The interaction between population dynamics and spatial heterogeneity has been recognized both theoretically and experimentally (Rosenzweig 1981, Morris 1989, 2003, Akçakaya 2000, Keith et al. 2008), yet it remains a mostly unaddressed issue for species distribution models.”
Scale dependency and functional response in moose habitat selection (2009, background): “This contradicts with the predictions from the ideal free distribution theory (Fretwell and Lucas 1969, Rosenzweig 1991) that increased density of animals should reduce the value of a patch in terms of fitness gains (McLoughlin et al. 2006), in turn leading to a reduction in preference for that habi”
LARVAL PERFORMANCE AND OVIPOSITION SITE PREFERENCE ALONG A PREDATION GRADIENT (2004, background): “Habitat selection is presumed to be an adaptive response to variation in habitat quality (e.g., Fretwell and Lucas 1970, Pulliam and Danielson 1991, Morris 2003), thus theory suggests that adults should choose oviposition sites that maximize offspring performance.”
Competitor density cues for habitat quality facilitating habitat selection and investment decisions (2008, background): “This is because costs of competition also increase with density (e.g., Fretwell and Lucas 1970; Rosenzweig 1981; Morris 2003; Shima and Osenberg 2003) and eventually outweigh the benefits of finding higher habitat quality, whereas low densities suggest such poor quality habitat or high mortality r”
Relating predation mortality to broad‐scale habitat selection (2005, background): “Most theory in habitat selection derives from hypotheses that assume discrete choices of resource selection have clear demographic consequences (Rosenzweig 1981; Morris 2003 ).”
Practical guidance on characterizing availability in resource selection functions under a use-availability design. (2013, background): “Understanding the selection process can provide insight into population regulation, species interactions, and predator–prey dynamics (Morris 2003) and thus is fundamental to animal ecology.”
Corridors for Conservation: Integrating Pattern and Process (2006, background): “The motivation for habitat selection is presumably to maximize individual fitness (Garshelis 2000) with consequences for distribution and density across different habitats (Morris 2003).”