Can minimum convex polygon home ranges be used to draw biologically meaningful conclusions?

By E. Nilsen, S. Pedersen, J. Linnell. Ecological research, 2008

198 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e36fa95ddf55f8e869a3f4c558b14e94a574c6b8

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecological Modeling

1. I. Herfindal
2. B. Sæther

In Ecology

1. E. Solberg
2. J. Tremblay
3. I. Herfindal
4. B. Sæther

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. E. Solberg
2. J. Tremblay
3. B. Sæther

Citations in the corpus

• Spatial scales of marine conservation management for breeding seabirds (2018, methodology): “A minimum convex polygon was chosen to encompass less frequently used areas, and 95% of locations were selected to avoid identifying an excessively large area due to some erratic trips or lowquality location estimates; this approach is deemed appropriate for similarly large-scale taxonomic compariso”
• Scale dependency and functional response in moose habitat selection (2009, background): “There are considerations with both home range estimators (Girard et al. 2002, Hemson et al. 2005, Börger et al. 2006b, Nilsen et al. 2008).”