↓ Skip to main content

Leveraging constraints and biotelemetry data to pinpoint repetitively used spatial features

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Leveraging constraints and biotelemetry data to pinpoint repetitively used spatial features
Published in
Ecology, December 2016
DOI 10.1002/ecy.1618
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian M. Brost, Mevin B. Hooten, Robert J. Small

Abstract

Satellite telemetry devices collect valuable information concerning the sites visited by animals, including the location of central places like dens, nests, rookeries, or haul-outs. Existing methods for estimating the location of central places from telemetry data require user-specified thresholds and ignore common nuances like measurement error. We present a fully model-based approach for locating central places from telemetry data that accounts for multiple sources of uncertainty and uses all of the available locational data. Our general framework consists of an observation model to account for large telemetry measurement error and animal movement, and a highly flexible mixture model specified using a Dirichlet process to identify the location of central places. We also quantify temporal patterns in central place use by incorporating ancillary behavioral data into the model; however, our framework is also suitable when no such behavioral data exist. We apply the model to a simulated data set as proof of concept. We then illustrate our framework by analyzing an Argos satellite telemetry data set on harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) in the Gulf of Alaska, a species that exhibits fidelity to terrestrial haul-out sites.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
South Africa 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 27%
Researcher 7 23%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 50%
Environmental Science 6 20%
Mathematics 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 October 2018.
All research outputs
#17,820,151
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Ecology
#5,936
of 6,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#290,960
of 419,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology
#96
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,560 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 419,304 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.