Journal list menu

Volume 28, Issue 4
Article

Correcting for missing and irregular data in home‐range estimation

C. H. Fleming

Corresponding Author

E-mail address: flemingc@si.edu

Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park, 1500 Remount Road, Front Royal, Virginia, 22630 USA

Department of Biology, University of Maryland College Park, College Park, Maryland, 20742 USA

Conservation International Indonesia, Marine Program, Jalan Pejaten Barat 16A, Kemang, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, 12550 Indonesia

E‐mail: flemingc@si.eduSearch for more papers by this author
D. Sheldon

College of Information and Computer Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, 01003‐9264 USA

Department of Computer Science, Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Massachusetts, 01075 USA

Search for more papers by this author
W. F. Fagan

Department of Biology, University of Maryland College Park, College Park, Maryland, 20742 USA

Search for more papers by this author
P. Leimgruber

Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park, 1500 Remount Road, Front Royal, Virginia, 22630 USA

Search for more papers by this author
T. Mueller

Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung, Senckenberganlage 25, 60325 Frankfurt (Main), Germany

Department of Biological Sciences, Goethe University, Max‐von‐Laue‐Straße 9, 60438 Frankfurt (Main), Germany

Search for more papers by this author
D. Nandintsetseg

Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung, Senckenberganlage 25, 60325 Frankfurt (Main), Germany

Department of Biological Sciences, Goethe University, Max‐von‐Laue‐Straße 9, 60438 Frankfurt (Main), Germany

Search for more papers by this author
M. J. Noonan

Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park, 1500 Remount Road, Front Royal, Virginia, 22630 USA

Search for more papers by this author
K. A. Olson

Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park, 1500 Remount Road, Front Royal, Virginia, 22630 USA

Wildlife Conservation Society, Mongolia Program, 201 San Business Center, Amar Street 29, Small Ring Road, Sukhbaatar District, Post 20A, Box‐21 Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia

Search for more papers by this author
E. Setyawan

Manta Trust‐Indonesian Manta Project, Badung, Bali, 80361 Indonesia

Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Launceston, Tasmania, 7250 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
A. Sianipar

Conservation International Indonesia, Marine Program, Jalan Pejaten Barat 16A, Kemang, Jakarta, DKI Jakarta, 12550 Indonesia

Search for more papers by this author
J. M. Calabrese

Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, National Zoological Park, 1500 Remount Road, Front Royal, Virginia, 22630 USA

Department of Biology, University of Maryland College Park, College Park, Maryland, 20742 USA

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 16 February 2018
Citations: 7
Corresponding Editor: Devin S. Johnson.

Abstract

Home‐range estimation is an important application of animal tracking data that is frequently complicated by autocorrelation, sampling irregularity, and small effective sample sizes. We introduce a novel, optimal weighting method that accounts for temporal sampling bias in autocorrelated tracking data. This method corrects for irregular and missing data, such that oversampled times are downweighted and undersampled times are upweighted to minimize error in the home‐range estimate. We also introduce computationally efficient algorithms that make this method feasible with large data sets. Generally speaking, there are three situations where weight optimization improves the accuracy of home‐range estimates: with marine data, where the sampling schedule is highly irregular, with duty cycled data, where the sampling schedule changes during the observation period, and when a small number of home‐range crossings are observed, making the beginning and end times more independent and informative than the intermediate times. Using both simulated data and empirical examples including reef manta ray, Mongolian gazelle, and African buffalo, optimal weighting is shown to reduce the error and increase the spatial resolution of home‐range estimates. With a conveniently packaged and computationally efficient software implementation, this method broadens the array of data sets with which accurate space‐use assessments can be made.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 7

  • Movements and habitat use of loons for assessment of conservation buffer zones in the Arctic Coastal Plain of northern Alaska, Global Ecology and Conservation, 10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e00980, (e00980), (2020).
  • Characterizing the landscape of movement to identify critical wildlife habitat and corridors, Conservation Biology, 10.1111/cobi.13519, 0, 0, (2020).
  • Do Monkeys Avoid Areas of Home Range Overlap Because They Are Dangerous? A Test of the Risk Hypothesis in White-Faced Capuchin Monkeys (Cebus capucinus), International Journal of Primatology, 10.1007/s10764-019-00110-0, (2020).
  • Sex-specific effects of reproductive season on bobcat space use, movement, and resource selection in the Appalachian Mountains of Virginia, PLOS ONE, 10.1371/journal.pone.0225355, 15, 8, (e0225355), (2020).
  • Ranging behaviour of Uganda’s elephants, African Journal of Ecology, 10.1111/aje.12643, 58, 1, (2-13), (2019).
  • A comprehensive analysis of autocorrelation and bias in home range estimation, Ecological Monographs, 10.1002/ecm.1344, 89, 2, (2019).
  • Simulating detection-censored movement records for home range analysis planning, Ecological Modelling, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.10.017, 392, (268-278), (2019).