Issues of residual spatial autocorrelation (RSA) and spatial scale are critical to the study of species-environment relationships, because RSA invalidates many statistical procedures, while the scale of analysis affects the quantification of these relationships. Although these issues independently are widely covered in the literature, only sparse attention is given to their integration. This paper focuses on the interplay between RSA and the spatial scaling of species-environment relationships. Using a hypothetical species in an artificial landscape, we show that a mismatch between the scale of analysis and the scale of a species' response to its environment leads to a decrease in the portion of variation explained by environmental predictors. Moreover, it results in RSA and biased regression coefficients. This bias stems from error-predictor dependencies due to the scale mismatch, the magnitude of which depends on the interaction between the scale of landscape heterogeneity and the scale of a species' response to this heterogeneity. We show that explicitly considering scale effects on RSA can reveal the characteristic scale of a species' response to its environment. This is important, because the estimation of species-environment relationships using spatial regression methods proves to be erroneous in case of a scale mismatch, leading to spurious conclusions when scaling issues are not explicitly considered. The findings presented here highlight the importance of examining the appropriateness of the spatial scales used in analyses, since scale mismatches affect the rigor of statistical analyses and thereby the ability to understand the processes underlying spatial patterning in ecological phenomena.

No abstract

In savannas, the tree–grass balance is governed by water, nutrients, fire and herbivory, and their interactions. We studied the hypothesis that herbivores indirectly affect vegetation structure by changing the availability of soil nutrients, which, in turn, alters the competition between trees and grasses. Nine abandoned livestock holding-pen areas (kraals), enriched by dung and urine, were contrasted with nearby control sites in a semi-arid savanna. About 40 years after abandonment, kraal sites still showed high soil concentrations of inorganic N, extractable P, K, Ca and Mg compared to controls. Kraals also had a high plant production potential and offered high quality forage. The intense grazing and high herbivore dung and urine deposition rates in kraals fit the accelerated nutrient cycling model described for fertile systems elsewhere. Data of a concurrent experiment also showed that bush-cleared patches resulted in an increase in impala dung deposition, probably because impala preferred open sites to avoid predation. Kraal sites had very low tree densities compared to control sites, thus the high impala dung deposition rates here may be in part driven by the open structure of kraal sites, which may explain the persistence of nutrients in kraals. Experiments indicated that tree seedlings were increasingly constrained when competing with grasses under fertile conditions, which might explain the low tree recruitment observed in kraals. In conclusion, large herbivores may indirectly keep existing nutrient hotspots such as abandoned kraals structurally open by maintaining a high local soil fertility, which, in turn, constrains woody recruitment in a negative feedback loop. The maintenance of nutrient hotspots such as abandoned kraals by herbivores contributes to the structural heterogeneity of nutrient-poor savanna vegetation.

Animal population sizes are often estimated using aerial sample counts by human observers, both for wildlife and livestock. The associated methods of counting remained more or less the same since the 1970s, but suffer from low precision and low accuracy of population estimates. Aerial counts using cost‐efficient Unmanned Aerial Vehicles or microlight aircrafts with cameras and an automated animal detection algorithm can potentially improve this precision and accuracy. Therefore, we evaluated the performance of the multi‐class convolutional neural network RetinaNet in detecting elephants, giraffes and zebras in aerial images from two Kenyan animal counts. The algorithm detected 95% of the number of elephants, 91% of giraffes and 90% of zebras that were found by four layers of human annotation, of which it correctly detected an extra 2.8% of elephants, 3.8% giraffes and 4.0% zebras that were missed by all humans, while detecting only 1.6 to 5.0 false positives per true positive. Furthermore, the animal detections by the algorithm were less sensitive to the sighting distance than humans were. With such a high recall and precision, we posit it is feasible to replace manual aerial animal count methods (from images and/or directly) by only the manual identification of image bounding boxes selected by the algorithm and then use a correction factor equal to the inverse of the undercounting bias in the calculation of the population estimates. This correction factor causes the standard error of the population estimate to increase slightly compared to a manual method, but this increase can be compensated for when the sampling effort would increase by 23%. However, an increase in sampling effort of 160% to 1,050% can be attained with the same expenses for equipment and personnel using our proposed semi‐automatic method compared to a manual method. Therefore, we conclude that our proposed aerial count method will improve the accuracy of population estimates and will decrease the standard error of population estimates by 31% to 67%. Most importantly, this animal detection algorithm has the potential to outperform humans in detecting animals from the air when supplied with images taken at a fixed rate.

Summary1. Understanding and accurately predicting the spatial patterns of habitat use by organisms is important for ecological research, biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management. However, this understanding is complicated by the effects of spatial scale, because the scale of analysis affects the quantification of species-environment relationships. 2. We therefore assessed the influence of environmental context (i.e. the characteristics of the landscape surrounding a site), varied over a large range of scales (i.e. ambit radii around focal sites), on the analysis and prediction of habitat selection by African elephants in Kruger National Park, South Africa. 3. We focused on the spatial scaling of the elephants' response to their main resources, forage and water, and found that the quantification of habitat selection strongly depended on the scales at which environmental context was considered. Moreover, the inclusion of environmental context at characteristic scales (i.e. those at which habitat selectivity was maximized) increased the predictive capacity of habitat suitability models. 4. The elephants responded to their environment in a scale-dependent and perhaps hierarchical manner, with forage characteristics driving habitat selection at coarse spatial scales, and surface water at fine spatial scales. 5. Furthermore, the elephants exhibited sexual habitat segregation, mainly in relation to vegetation characteristics. Male elephants preferred areas with high tree cover and low herbaceous biomass, whereas this pattern was reversed for female elephants. 6. We show that the spatial distribution of elephants can be better understood and predicted when scale-dependent species-environment relationships are explicitly considered. This demonstrates the importance of considering the influence of spatial scale on the analysis of spatial patterning in ecological phenomena.