Resource Selection Functions Based on Use–Availability Data: Theoretical Motivation and Evaluation Methods

By Chris J. Johnson, Scott E. Nielsen, Evelyn H. Merrill, T. Mcdonald, M. Boyce. 2006

767 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Economics and Econometrics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e06717a9acb01e5ba7d680d98d1fbd7bbd47d52c

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecology

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

Modelling distribution and abundance with presence‐only data (2006, methodology): “(2002), and in practice its application differs only because resource units that appear in the used sample also can appear in the sample of available units (Johnson et al. 2006).”
Functional connectivity within conservation networks: Delineating corridors for African elephants (2013, methodology): “Therefore, the density of random points was chosen to reduce contamination to less than 20% based on Johnson et al. (2006).”
A MULTI-SCALE TEST OF THE FORAGE MATURATION HYPOTHESIS IN A PARTIALLY MIGRATORY UNGULATE POPULATION (2008, methodology): “See Manly et al. (2002) and Johnson et al. (2006) for discussion of the use of logistic regression to estimate the exponential RSF model.”
Effects of landscape-scale broadleaved woodland configuration and extent on roost location for six bat species across the UK (2011, background): “In this situation, logistic regression has been shown to produce valid parameter estimates, with the caveat that predicted probabilities of occurrence cannot be directly interpreted, instead they represent a value that is proportional to the probability of occurrence (Johnson et al., 2006; Manly et ”
Wolves, white-tailed deer, and beaver: implications of seasonal prey switching for woodland caribou declines (2013, methodology): “We assessed wolf seasonal spatial resource selection by estimating resource selection functions (RSF) (Manly et al. 2002, Johnson et al. 2006) based on seasonal prey distribution layers, i.e. our models considered those resources that directly contribute to a wolf ’s survival and reproductive…”
Flexible habitat selection by cougars in response to anthropogenic development (2014, methodology): “Resource selection functions are a robust tool for estimating the relative probability of selection by animals (Johnson et al., 2006; Lele et al., 2013).”
Habitat suitability modelling and niche theory (2008, methodology): “Then, most methods look for the smallest combination of variables that produces the best fit to the data (Johnson et al .”
Practical guidance on characterizing availability in resource selection functions under a use-availability design. (2013, methodology): “The most common method for examining habitat selection patterns from GPS radio collar data is the resource selection function (RSF, see Table 1 [Manly et al. 2002, Johnson et al. 2006]).”
Corridors for Conservation: Integrating Pattern and Process (2006, methodology): “Predictive ability of an RSF can be assessed using k-fold cross-validation methods outlined by Johnson et al. (2006).”
Accounting for animal movement in estimation of resource selection functions: sampling and data analysis. (2009, methodology): “For details on how we accounted for autocorrelation in the regression procedure and for the computation of robust standard errors of the selection coefficient estimates, see Appendix C.”
Habitat selection models for European wildcat conservation (2008, background): “One advantage over the more traditional presence–absence approach is that we do not have an asymmetry of errors, which occurs when species are cryptic and absences are not as reliable as presences (Boyce et al., 2002; Johnson et al., 2006).”
Grizzly bears and forestry: II: Grizzly bear habitat selection and conflicts with road placement (2008, methodology): “Logistic regression was used to estimate b coefficients (Manly et al., 2002; Johnson et al., 2006), where grizzly bear locations (1) were compared to random locations (0).”
Population-level resource selection by sympatric brown and American black bears in Alaska (2009, background): “A disadvantage of this approach is that areas considered unused may actually be used but not detected because of low sampling frequency or animal detection rates of \1 (Johnson et al. 2006; MacKenzie 2006).”