Comparability of three analytical techniques to assess joint space use

By Joshua J. Millspaugh, Robert A. Gitzen, B. J. Kernohan, Michael A. Larson, Christopher L. Clay. 2004

131 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.

Effects of Point Pattern Shape on Home-Range Estimates (2008, methodology): “The LSCV has been widely recommended as a bandwidth selection method for KDE-based home-range analysis (e.g., Seaman and Powell 1996, Swihart and Slade 1997, Seaman et al. 1999, Gitzen and Millspaugh 2003, Millspaugh et al. 2004).”
QUANTIFYING HOME-RANGE OVERLAP: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE UTILIZATION DISTRIBUTION (2005, background): “…rank pairs of UDs in terms of their overlap supports their recent application as meaningful response variables for correlation/regression analysis (Millspaugh et al. 2000, Roloff et al. 2001), as measures of site fidelity that can be compared across various time periods (Marzluff et al. 2001),…”
Estimating Utilization Distributions with Kernel Versus Local Convex Hull Methods (2011, methodology): “We compared each estimated UD to its corresponding parent distribution using the VI index (Seidel 1992, Millspaugh et al. 2004, Fieberg and Kochanny 2005).”
Statistical inference for home range overlap (2018, methodology): “Overlap is typically conditional on HR estimates (Fieberg & Kochanny, 2005; Millspaugh et al., 2004), which are themselves estimated from animal tracking data.”