↓ Skip to main content

Measuring individuality in habitat use across complex landscapes: approaches, constraints, and implications for assessing resource specialization

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
Title
Measuring individuality in habitat use across complex landscapes: approaches, constraints, and implications for assessing resource specialization
Published in
Oecologia, February 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00442-014-3212-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

F. Joel Fodrie, Lauren A. Yeager, Jonathan H. Grabowski, Craig A. Layman, Graham D. Sherwood, Matthew D. Kenworthy

Abstract

Many mobile marine species are presumed to utilize a broad spectrum of habitats, but this seemingly generalist life history may arise from conspecifics specializing on distinct habitat alternatives to exploit foraging, resting/refuge, or reproductive opportunities. We acoustically tagged 34 red drum, and mapped sand, seagrass, marsh, or oyster (across discrete landscape contexts) use by each uniquely coded individual. Using 144,000 acoustic detections, we recorded differences in habitat use among red drum: proportional use of seagrass habitat ranged from 0 to 100 %, and use of oyster-bottom types also varied among fish. WIC/TNW and IS metrics (previously applied vis-à-vis diet specialization) consistently indicated that a typical red drum overlapped >70 % with population-level niche exploitation. Monte Carlo permutations showed these values were lower than expected had fish drawn from a common habitat-use distribution, but longitudinal comparisons did not provide evidence of temporally consistent individuality, suggesting that differences among individuals were plastic and not reflective of true specialization. Given the range of acoustic detections we captured (from tens to 1,000s per individual), which are substantially larger sample sizes than in many diet studies, we extended our findings by serially reducing or expanding our data in simulations to evaluate sample-size effects. We found that the results of null hypothesis testing for specialization were highly dependent on sample size, with thresholds in the relationship between sample size and associated P-values. These results highlight opportunities and potential caveats in exploring individuality in habitat use. More broadly, exploring individual specialization in fine-scale habitat use suggests that, for mobile marine species, movement behaviors over shorter (≤weeks), but not longer (≥months), timescales may serve as an underlying mechanism for other forms of resource specialization.

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 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 3 2%
Hungary 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 146 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 24%
Researcher 30 19%
Student > Master 29 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 14 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 88 56%
Environmental Science 36 23%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 1%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 1%
Social Sciences 2 1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 26 16%
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 18 February 2015.
All research outputs
#18,401,176
of 22,792,160 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#3,645
of 4,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#260,971
of 357,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#59
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,792,160 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,213 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 357,845 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.