1998
DOI: 10.2307/3802356
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of Resource Selection Methods with Different Definitions of Availability

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
79
0
1

Year Published

2001
2001
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 111 publications
(82 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
2
79
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, the choice of scale of analysis influences the amount of habitat deemed available (Johnson 1980, McClean et al 1998. In the coarsest scale of analysis, deer use of cover types within seasonal ranges during the winters of 1995 and 1996 was compared to that expected based on the composition of the entire seasonal range.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, the choice of scale of analysis influences the amount of habitat deemed available (Johnson 1980, McClean et al 1998. In the coarsest scale of analysis, deer use of cover types within seasonal ranges during the winters of 1995 and 1996 was compared to that expected based on the composition of the entire seasonal range.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also included disturbances directly adjacent to the east and west boundaries defined by the summed BBMMs as it is likely that these disturbances influenced those longitudinal boundaries and movements of individuals. That method allowed us to create a study area that represented availability of resources within the NOA to mule deer during both spring (n ¼ 26) and autumn (n ¼ 10) migrations (McClean et al 1998). We used Google Earth and its associated imagery (Google Earth 2012) along with ArcGIS 10.1 editing tools to digitize a disturbance layer that delineated current surface disturbances within the study area boundary.…”
Section: Resource Selection Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This procedure is robust to scaling changes and Type n errors, and permits the determination of confidence limits for the indices (Allredge & Ratti 1992 a,b;McClean et al 1998). discriminant analysis was used to examine the most parsimonious combination of shelter and lobster size class information that best described the various regions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%