On Spatial Resolution in Habitat Models: Can Small-scale Forest Structure Explain Capercaillie Numbers?

By I. Storch. 2002

114 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.

Scale of inference: on the sensitivity of habitat models for wide‐ranging marine predators to the resolution of environmental data (2017, result): “This result concords with previous analyses of the effects of spatial resolution in other modelling applications (Guisan et al. 2007, Redfern et al. 2008, Becker et al. 2010), but see (Storch 2002, Gottschalk et al. 2011, Bean et al. 2014).”
Identifying predictable foraging habitats for a wide‐ranging marine predator using ensemble ecological niche models (2015, background): “Matching the spatial resolution of remotely sensed data sets with the scales over which animals locate key foraging areas remains a major challenge in habitat modelling (Storch, 2002; Luoto et al., 2007), particularly in the marine realm (Ara ujo & Guisan, 2006; Hirzel et al., 2006).”
Living on the edge - modelling habitat suitability for species at the edge of their fundamental niche (2008, methodology): “For each forest stand (N = 2211), we combined the varibles to a habitat suitability index for capercaillie (HSIyear) sing the expert model developed by Storch (2002).”
Grouse : status survey and conservation action plan 2006-2010 (2000, background): “For a grouse population to persist, its habitat requirements must be met at all scales (e.g., Storch 1995, 2002; Kortland 2003).”