↓ Skip to main content

Comparing Habitat Suitability and Connectivity Modeling Methods for Conserving Pronghorn Migrations

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
114 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
340 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
Comparing Habitat Suitability and Connectivity Modeling Methods for Conserving Pronghorn Migrations
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0049390
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erin E. Poor, Colby Loucks, Andrew Jakes, Dean L. Urban

Abstract

Terrestrial long-distance migrations are declining globally: in North America, nearly 75% have been lost. Yet there has been limited research comparing habitat suitability and connectivity models to identify migration corridors across increasingly fragmented landscapes. Here we use pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) migrations in prairie habitat to compare two types of models that identify habitat suitability: maximum entropy (Maxent) and expert-based (Analytic Hierarchy Process). We used distance to wells, distance to water, NDVI, land cover, distance to roads, terrain shape and fence presence to parameterize the models. We then used the output of these models as cost surfaces to compare two common connectivity models, least-cost modeling (LCM) and circuit theory. Using pronghorn movement data from spring and fall migrations, we identified potential migration corridors by combining each habitat suitability model with each connectivity model. The best performing model combination was Maxent with LCM corridors across both seasons. Maxent out-performed expert-based habitat suitability models for both spring and fall migrations. However, expert-based corridors can perform relatively well and are a cost-effective alternative if species location data are unavailable. Corridors created using LCM out-performed circuit theory, as measured by the number of pronghorn GPS locations present within the corridors. We suggest the use of a tiered approach using different corridor widths for prioritizing conservation and mitigation actions, such as fence removal or conservation easements.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 340 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
China 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
India 1 <1%
Other 4 1%
Unknown 316 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 70 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 19%
Researcher 63 19%
Student > Bachelor 34 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 5%
Other 42 12%
Unknown 51 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 142 42%
Environmental Science 100 29%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 2%
Engineering 6 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 1%
Other 14 4%
Unknown 67 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 17 November 2012.
All research outputs
#20,172,971
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#172,801
of 193,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,200
of 159,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,987
of 4,755 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,650 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 159,110 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,755 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.