Use, selection, and home range properties: complex patterns of individual habitat utilization

Abstract

Individual patterns of habitat use emerge from behavioral decisions driven by interactions between landscape characteristics and individual traits. Individual traits, such as age and sex, influence the net gain of using habitats and associated resources, and thus the relationship between size and composition of the home range. However, the pathways from individual variation in home range size and composition to habitat selection are rarely fully explored. We investigated how habitat selection in moose (Alces alces) was a result of individual traits and home range characteristics, that is, we described the pathway from home range to habitat selection. The study was conducted at two spatial scales during two contrasting seasons. Home range size and composition varied with sex, with season, and to some extent with age. Males had larger home range size, and the composition of their home ranges changed more with home range size than for females. The general trend was that moose used habitats according to availability more in winter than in summer, that is, a weaker habitat selection in winter than in summer. Sex and age explained little of the variation in habitat selection, but sex had a pronounced effect on the relationship between home range size and composition. Because habitat availability (i.e., home range composition) is a component of habitat selection, it suggests that varying habitat use partly compensates for sex‐specific differences in home range composition, which in turn results from home range settlement. Hence, although males and females showed similar habitat selection, they differed in the underlying mechanisms generating the pattern of habitat selection. These complex interactions between individual traits and environmental variation have consequences for how we understand the relationships between landscape characteristics, individual behavior, and fitness.

Context-dependent foraging habitat selection in a farmland raptor along an agricultural intensification gradient

“…Males were more strongly tied to cropland than females. Sexdependent habitat selection is quite widespread within vertebrates and may be related to sex differences in offspring provisioning (Bergan and Smith, 1989;Laforge et al, 2021;Ofstad et al, 2019;van Toor et al, 2011). On the one hand, in Greek intensive agricultural landscapes, Vlachos et al (2015) reported that male lesser kestrels positively selected cereals and field margins while females preferred grasslands and cotton fields.…”

“…Additional factors that may contribute to explain inter-individual variability (but could not be considered in this study) include age/experience, personality, or body condition (e.g. Harris et al, 2020;Lesmerises and St-Laurent, 2017;Nilsen et al, 2009;Ofstad et al, 2019).…”

Mortality, perception, and scale: Understanding how predation shapes space use in a wild prey population

“…The average home range of females on high-risk sites doubled from the pre- to early-hunting seasons, but individual responses ranged from a 1052% decrease to a 98% increase. Perceived predation risk manifests individually [79,80], and responses are likely a complex process unique to each individual as trade-offs inherent in home range adjustments are likely sensitive to a range of factors including sex, age, experiences, body condition, resource availability, familiarity with the surrounding landscape [81–84], and maybe most importantly, predator encounter rate [21]. Although there were substantial differences in the number of hunters between high- and low-risk sites (Fig 2), hunter movements within sites ultimately determine encounter rates for individual pheasants [85].…”

Opposing fitness consequences of habitat use in a harvested moose population

“…Moose are able to cross distances larger than the study area during the summer (Bjørneraas et al, 2010), making the entire island available. Consequently, habitat use is similar to habitat selection at the landscape scale, where habitat use is found to be proportional to availability, that is, no habitat selection (Ofstad et al, 2019). However, the high availability of open grassland implies that moose can frequently use this resource without necessarily showing a selection for it (Herfindal et al, 2009).…”