Cargando…

Estimating resource selection with count data

Resource selection functions (RSFs) are typically estimated by comparing covariates at a discrete set of “used” locations to those from an “available” set of locations. This RSF approach treats the response as binary and does not account for intensity of use among habitat units where locations were...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nielson, Ryan M, Sawyer, Hall
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3728960/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23919165
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.617
_version_ 1782278939357478912
author Nielson, Ryan M
Sawyer, Hall
author_facet Nielson, Ryan M
Sawyer, Hall
author_sort Nielson, Ryan M
collection PubMed
description Resource selection functions (RSFs) are typically estimated by comparing covariates at a discrete set of “used” locations to those from an “available” set of locations. This RSF approach treats the response as binary and does not account for intensity of use among habitat units where locations were recorded. Advances in global positioning system (GPS) technology allow animal location data to be collected at fine spatiotemporal scales and have increased the size and correlation of data used in RSF analyses. We suggest that a more contemporary approach to analyzing such data is to model intensity of use, which can be estimated for one or more animals by relating the relative frequency of locations in a set of sampling units to the habitat characteristics of those units with count-based regression and, in particular, negative binomial (NB) regression. We demonstrate this NB RSF approach with location data collected from 10 GPS-collared Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus) in the Starkey Experimental Forest and Range enclosure. We discuss modeling assumptions and show how RSF estimation with NB regression can easily accommodate contemporary research needs, including: analysis of large GPS data sets, computational ease, accounting for among-animal variation, and interpretation of model covariates. We recommend the NB approach because of its conceptual and computational simplicity, and the fact that estimates of intensity of use are unbiased in the face of temporally correlated animal location data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3728960
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37289602013-08-05 Estimating resource selection with count data Nielson, Ryan M Sawyer, Hall Ecol Evol Original Research Resource selection functions (RSFs) are typically estimated by comparing covariates at a discrete set of “used” locations to those from an “available” set of locations. This RSF approach treats the response as binary and does not account for intensity of use among habitat units where locations were recorded. Advances in global positioning system (GPS) technology allow animal location data to be collected at fine spatiotemporal scales and have increased the size and correlation of data used in RSF analyses. We suggest that a more contemporary approach to analyzing such data is to model intensity of use, which can be estimated for one or more animals by relating the relative frequency of locations in a set of sampling units to the habitat characteristics of those units with count-based regression and, in particular, negative binomial (NB) regression. We demonstrate this NB RSF approach with location data collected from 10 GPS-collared Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus) in the Starkey Experimental Forest and Range enclosure. We discuss modeling assumptions and show how RSF estimation with NB regression can easily accommodate contemporary research needs, including: analysis of large GPS data sets, computational ease, accounting for among-animal variation, and interpretation of model covariates. We recommend the NB approach because of its conceptual and computational simplicity, and the fact that estimates of intensity of use are unbiased in the face of temporally correlated animal location data. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2013-07 2013-06-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3728960/ /pubmed/23919165 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.617 Text en © 2013 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ Re-use of this article is permitted in accordance with the Creative Commons Deed, Attribution 2.5, which does not permit commercial exploitation.
spellingShingle Original Research
Nielson, Ryan M
Sawyer, Hall
Estimating resource selection with count data
title Estimating resource selection with count data
title_full Estimating resource selection with count data
title_fullStr Estimating resource selection with count data
title_full_unstemmed Estimating resource selection with count data
title_short Estimating resource selection with count data
title_sort estimating resource selection with count data
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3728960/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23919165
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.617
work_keys_str_mv AT nielsonryanm estimatingresourceselectionwithcountdata
AT sawyerhall estimatingresourceselectionwithcountdata