Home range dynamics and population regulation: An individual-based model of the common shrew Sorex araneus

Wang, Magnus; Grimm, Volker

doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.03.003

Cited by 101 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

100

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of empirical studies have shown that home range size depends on habitat structure and/or resource density (Ebersole 1980;Prohl and Berke 2001;Buner et al 2005; our study). Home range size is generally predicted to decrease when population density increases (Kjellander et al 2004;Wang and Grimm 2007). However, we lack empirical evidence that home range size and population dynamics are similarly controlled by the interplay of habitat structure and resource density.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…These factors are in turn linked to key parameters of population dynamics. For example, with decreasing home range size, population density and dispersal rate are predicted to increase (Kjellander et al 2004;Wang and Grimm 2007). Thus, home range size is a general variable for studying spatially structured populations, and it is informative for population management (Lomnicki 1988).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Behavior‐Based Scale Definitions for Determining Individual Space Use: Requirements of Two Amphibians

Indermaur¹,

Gehring²,

Wehrle³

et al. 2009

The American Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding individual space use remains a major issue in ecology, and it is complicated by definitions of spatial scale and the interplay of multiple factors. We quantified the effect of habitat and biotic and individual factors on space use by amphibians (Bufo bufo spinosus [BB] and Bufo viridis [BV]) that were radio-tracked in their terrestrial summer habitat. We analyzed two spatial scales, 50% core areas and 95% home ranges (excluding 50% core areas), thought to represent resting and foraging areas, respectively. The 50% core area of BB was best explained by habitat structure and prey density, whereas the 50% core area of BV was determined solely by habitat structure. This suggests that the resting and foraging areas of BB are not spatially separated. The 95% home range of BB was determined by prey density, while for BV both habitat structure and prey density determined home range size. We conclude that the terrestrial area requirements of amphibians depend on the productivity and spatiotemporal complexity of landscapes and that differential space use may facilitate their co-occurrence. Behavior-based a priori hypotheses, in combination with an information-theoretic approach and path analyses, provide a promising framework to disentangle factors that govern individual space use, thereby advancing home range studies. [BV]) that were radiotracked in their terrestrial summer habitat. We analyzed two spatial scales, 50% core areas and 95% home ranges (excluding 50% core areas), thought to represent resting and foraging areas, respectively. The 50% core area of BB was best explained by habitat structure and prey density, whereas the 50% core area of BV was determined solely by habitat structure. This suggests that the resting and foraging areas of BB are not spatially separated. The 95% home range of BB was determined by prey density, while for BV both habitat structure and prey density determined home range size. We conclude that the terrestrial area requirements of amphibians depend on the productivity and spatiotemporal complexity of landscapes and that differential space use may facilitate their co-occurrence. Behavior-based a priori hypotheses, in combination with an information-theoretic approach and path analyses, provide a promising framework to dis-

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavior‐Based Scale Definitions for Determining Individual Space Use: Requirements of Two Amphibians

Indermaur¹,

Gehring²,

Wehrle³

et al. 2009

The American Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They have been used to address questions at a range of spatial and temporal scales varying from models of home range dynamics and daily movements [200,201] to multi-decadal models of species range shifting [19]. IBMs have also been used extensively to study landscape connectivity: identifying threats to populations [202] and testing the impacts of future scenarios [203,204].…”

Section: Process-based Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emerging Opportunities for Landscape Ecological Modelling

Synes

Brown

Watts

et al. 2016

Curr Landscape Ecol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Landscape ecological modelling provides a vital means for understanding the interactions between geographical, climatic, and socio-economic drivers of land-use and the dynamics of ecological systems. This growing field is playing an increasing role in informing landscape spatial planning and management. Here, we review the key modelling approaches that are used in landscape modelling and in ecological modelling. We identify an emerging theme of increasingly detailed representation of process in both landscape and ecological modelling, with complementary suites of modelling approaches ranging from correlative, through aggregated process based approaches to models with much greater structural realism that often represent behaviours at the level of agents or individuals. We provide examples of the considerable progress that has been made at the intersection of landscape modelling and ecological modelling, while also highlighting that the majority of this work has to date exploited a relatively small number of the possible combinations of model types from each discipline. We use this review to identify key gaps in existing landscape ecological modelling effort and highlight emerging opportunities, in particular for future work to progress in novel directions by combining classes of landscape models and ecological models that have rarely been used together.

show abstract

“…Individuals confining their movements to a specific area impacts the ecology of a species or population, potentially shaping predator-prey dynamics (Lewis & Murray 1993), habitat selection (Rhodes et al 2005), and population regulation (Wang & Grimm 2007). Familiarity with its home range often benefits an individual by increasing efficiency in feeding (Hughes & Blight 2000) and avoidance of habitats with high predator density (Brown 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Season and site fidelity determine home range of dispersing and resident juvenile Greenland cod Gadus ogac in a Newfoundland fjord

Shapiera¹,

Gregory²,

Morris³

et al. 2014

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used acoustic telemetry to track age 1 juvenile Greenland cod Gadus ogac in Newman Sound, Newfoundland, from October 2010 to November 2012, in 2 consecutive 1 yr experiments. Using single (Year 1) and reciprocal (Year 2) transplant study designs, we investigated seasonal dispersal, home range area, and potential homing behaviour between coves 3.5 km apart. We tracked individuals moving at metre to kilometre scales, using a network of 26 to 32 hydrophones. We converted tag detections to position estimates in order to calculate seasonal home ranges and individual movement patterns. Home range increased significantly with season (pre-winter, winter, and post-winter) in both study years. Mean seasonal home range area ranged from 0.29 to 3.47 km 2 in Year 1 and 0.43 to 1.72 km 2 in Year 2. In contrast, fish size-at-capture, capture location, and release location had no significant effect on seasonal home range. Increased movement distance during the winter and post-winter season suggests a reduction in predation pressure on age 1 juveniles at these times, challenging previous assumptions about their vulnerability. We observed variable behaviour spanning residency to kilometre-scale dispersal movements, which represent greater distances than previously assumed. Similar proportions of control and transplant fish visited the other cove, indicating an absence of homing behaviour among dispersing individuals. Juveniles of marine fishes are often characterized as key life history transition stages between vulnerable larvae and older, larger individuals which are less susceptible to predators. Our results indicate that early juvenile life stages may be substantially more mobile than presupposed and contribute to population connectivity in temperate fishes in ways not well described previously.

show abstract

Home range dynamics and population regulation: An individual-based model of the common shrew Sorex araneus

Cited by 101 publications

References 32 publications

Behavior‐Based Scale Definitions for Determining Individual Space Use: Requirements of Two Amphibians

Behavior‐Based Scale Definitions for Determining Individual Space Use: Requirements of Two Amphibians

Emerging Opportunities for Landscape Ecological Modelling

Season and site fidelity determine home range of dispersing and resident juvenile Greenland cod Gadus ogac in a Newfoundland fjord

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About