LINEAR HOME RANGES: EFFECTS OF SMOOTHING, SAMPLE SIZE, AND AUTOCORRELATION ON KERNEL ESTIMATES
By G. Blundell, J. Maier, E. Debevec. 2001
269 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecology, Genetics, Small Animals
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ca3249cfb3c3fa559da59f732c70e2bf72a4856e
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology
- J. Row
- M. Ben-David
- R. D. Semlitsch
- T. A. Rittenhouse
- G. Blouin‐Demers
- E. Nilsen
- Robert Swihart
- Nathanael I. Lichti
In Genetics
- Robert Swihart
- Nathanael I. Lichti
- J. Row
- M. Ben-David
- R. Terry Bowyer
- G. Blouin‐Demers
- T. Coulson
- Andrea Manica
In Small Animals
- Robert Swihart
- Nathanael I. Lichti
- M. Ben-David
- R. Terry Bowyer
- J. Linnell
- G. Blouin‐Demers
- Joni A. Downs
- Mark W. Horner
Citations in the corpus
- What Is the Proper Methodto Delineate Home Range of anAnimal Using Today’s AdvancedGPS Telemetry Systems: The Initial Step (2011, unknown): “We conclude with others in cautioning against subsampling as it only serves to potentially remove important movement parameters or habitats used and will not result in the same estimate of home range size as the complete GPS dataset (Blundell et al., 2001; Pellerin et al., 2008; Rodgers & Kie 2010).”
- Estimating Utilization Distributions with Kernel Versus Local Convex Hull Methods (2011, methodology): “For KDE, this parameter is the bandwidth or smoothing parameter, h, and a substantial literature has developed methods for selecting its optimal value in specific situations (Seaman and Powell 1996, Seaman et al. 1999, Blundell et al. 2001, Hemson et al. 2005, Gitzen et al. 2006).”
- Can minimum convex polygon home ranges be used to draw biologically meaningful conclusions? (2008, background): “2005) and methodological (Blundell et al. 2001; Borger et al. 2006a) differences between the studies.”
- Sociality in river otters: cooperative foraging or reproductive strategies? (2002, methodology): “Blundell et al. (2001) evaluated data collected during behavioral observations of river otters in PWS in 1991 (Rock et al., 1994) and reported that otters foraged an average of 5.1 m from shore (n 119, SE 0.9, range 1–80 m).”
- Effects of Point Pattern Shape on Home-Range Estimates (2008, background): “…to overestimate home ranges in some instances where animal locations do not conform to bivariate normal mixtures, such as those that are linear (Blundell et al. 2001), have sharp edges (Getz and Wilmers 2004), or contain large amounts of empty space within their interior (Getz and Wilmers…”
- A Critical Review of Home Range Studies (2008, background): “…has been a contentious issue with reference to serial autocorrelation (Swihart and Slade 1985a, Hansteen et al. 1997, Otis and White 1999, Blundell et al. 2001, Fieberg 2007), site fidelity (Spencer et al. 1990, Swihart and Slade 1997), and number of location estimates per animal…”
- High-density areas for harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) identified by satellite tracking (2011, background): “CHOISE OF SMOOTHING FACTOR (BAND WIDTH) The impact of smoothing factor on the results of the kernel density estimations have been widely studied, although no congruence of best practice has been established (Worton 1989, Blundell et al. 2001).”
- Effects of sampling regime on the mean and variance of home range size estimates. (2006, methodology): “However, this focus has recently been shown to be misguided: De Solla et al. (1999) and Blundell et al. (2001) demonstrated that removing autocorrelation removes the biological signal of interest, and Otis & White (1999) showed that the conclusions of the analyses of Swihart & Slade (1985) were ba”
- Kernels Are Not Accurate Estimators of Home-range Size for Herpetofauna (2006, background): “Other problems associated with the number of locations and the patterns of space use by individuals can also lead to variable estimates of home-range sizes when using kernels (Seaman et al., 1999; Blundell et al., 2001; Hemson et al., 2005).”
- Distribution of amphibians in terrestrial habitat surrounding wetlands (2007, background): “…is currently the preferred home range estimator in most situations (Seaman et al. 1999, Kernohan et al. 2001), but can produce biased estimates of space use when data are linear in nature (Blundell et al. 2001) and thus produces poor descriptions of amphibian habitat use from migration data.”