The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2015.11.037
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Community occupancy of herpetofauna in roadside ditches in a managed pine landscape

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…, Homyack et al. ). Across the herpetofaunal community, occupancy and species richness were consistently positively associated with SMZ width, with maximum estimated richness of 30 species occurring at sites with buffers extending 51 m on either side of the stream.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…, Homyack et al. ). Across the herpetofaunal community, occupancy and species richness were consistently positively associated with SMZ width, with maximum estimated richness of 30 species occurring at sites with buffers extending 51 m on either side of the stream.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used a hierarchical Bayesian community occupancy model (Dorazio and Royle , Homyack et al. ) to estimate species‐specific occupancy and detection probability as a function of site‐specific covariates (average SMZ width, stand age categories, SMZ composition, site PC1, and site PC2) and sampling covariates (sampling PC1 and sampling PC2). This hierarchical approach incorporates species‐specific and assemblage‐level (i.e., salamander, reptile, or anuran groups) covariate effects into the same modeling framework, thus allowing estimation of species‐specific occurrence and detection probabilities and site‐specific species richness while also accounting for imperfect detection (Dorazio and Royle , Zipkin et al.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…; Homyack et al . ). Under the hierarchical community model, we assume species‐specific effects for a given parameter are drawn from one of two common normal distributions, for example, normalαnormalLeafnormalgleaner,iNfalse(μ1,σ12false) for parameter αnormalLeafnormalgleaner of species i, where the mean and variance of αLeafgleaner,i are population‐level hyperparameters depending on whether species i is a leaf‐gleaner species.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…To evaluate specific predictions about avian responses to herbicide treatments, we included a hyperprior in the model to distinguish leaf-gleaner and non-leaf-gleaner guilds (Gelman & Hill 2007;Pacifici et al 2014;Homyack et al 2016). Under the hierarchical community model, we assume species-specific effects for a given parameter are drawn from one of two common normal distributions, for example, a LeafÀgleaner;i $ Nðl 1 ; r 2 1 Þ for parameter a LeafÀgleaner of species i, where the mean and variance of a LeafÀgleaner;i are population-level hyperparameters depending on whether species i is a leaf-gleaner species.…”
Section: A N a L Y S I Smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most rare and threatened species in ROW are plants or invertebrates, but some rare vertebrates have also been documented, including toad, turtle, and snake species of conservation concern in the US state of North Carolina (Homyack et al . ), two rare species of pygmy possum in South Australia (Carthew et al . ), and threatened avian fauna worldwide (Morelli et al .…”
Section: Habitats For Rare and Threatened Speciesmentioning
confidence: 99%