Fractal analysis measures habitat use at different spatial scales: an example with American marten

110 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Indices of movement behaviour: conceptual background, effects of scale and location errors (2010, methodology): “Another advantage is the use of change in Fractal D with scale to detect changes in movement behaviour with scale (WITH 1994, NAMS 1996, NAMS & BOURGEOIS 2004, NAMS 2005, TREMBLAY et al. 2007).”
Diel movements of fishes linked to benthic seascape structure in a Caribbean coral reef ecosystem (2011, methodology): “Recent work has raised concerns about calculating overall D values for movement paths that are correlated random walks (i.e. when the overall movement path is random but successive points are correlated; Nams & Bourgeois 2004, Papastamatiou et al. 2009).”
Habitat Selection at Multiple Scales (2009, methodology): “Fractal methods characterize the spatial structure of movement paths, and they allow comparison to a benchmark such as a correlated random walk (Crist et al., 1992; With, 1994; Wiens et al., 1995; Mårell, Ball & Hofgaard, 2002; Nams & Bourgeois, 2004).”
Interpatch movement and edge effects: the role of behavioral responses to the landscape matrix (2006, unknown): “We used the fractal mean method, which is based on the traditional dividers method (Mandelbrot 1967, Sugihara and May 1990), but corrects for estimation errors created when the last divider step does not fall exactly on the end of the path (Nams and Bourgeois 2004).”