↓ Skip to main content

Is there a single best estimator? Selection of home range estimators using area-under-the-curve

Overview of attention for article published in Movement Ecology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
411 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
Is there a single best estimator? Selection of home range estimators using area-under-the-curve
Published in
Movement Ecology, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40462-015-0039-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

W David Walter, Dave P Onorato, Justin W Fischer

Abstract

Global positioning system (GPS) technology for monitoring home range and movements of wildlife has resulted in prohibitively large sample sizes of locations for traditional estimators of home range. We used area-under-the-curve to explore the fit of 8 estimators of home range to data collected with both GPS and concurrent very high frequency (VHF) technology on a terrestrial mammal, the Florida panther Puma concolor coryi, to evaluate recently developed and traditional estimators. Area-under-the-curve was the highest for Florida panthers equipped with Global Positioning System (GPS) technology compared to VHF technology. For our study animal, estimators of home range that incorporated a temporal component to estimation performed better than traditional first- and second-generation estimators. Comparisons of fit of home range contours with locations collected would suggest that use of VHF technology is not as accurate as GPS technology to estimate size of home range for large mammals. Estimators of home range collected with GPS technology performed better than those estimated with VHF technology regardless of estimator used. Furthermore, estimators that incorporate a temporal component (third-generation estimators) appeared to be the most reliable regardless of whether kernel-based or Brownian bridge-based algorithms were used and in comparison to first- and second-generation estimators. We defined third-generation estimators of home range as any estimator that incorporates time, space, animal-specific parameters, and habitat. Such estimators would include movement-based kernel density, Brownian bridge movement models, and dynamic Brownian bridge movement models among others that have yet to be evaluated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 411 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Iceland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 402 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 112 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 80 19%
Researcher 56 14%
Student > Bachelor 28 7%
Other 19 5%
Other 49 12%
Unknown 67 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 201 49%
Environmental Science 85 21%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 9 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 1%
Engineering 5 1%
Other 23 6%
Unknown 82 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 13 January 2017.
All research outputs
#15,395,259
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Movement Ecology
#267
of 316 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,771
of 237,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Movement Ecology
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 316 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.3. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 237,857 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.