Anni Yang, Raoul Boughton, Ryan S Miller, Nathan P Snow, Kurt C Vercauteren, Kim M Pepin, George Wittemyer
{"title":"个体层面的资源选择模式不能预测接触热点。","authors":"Anni Yang, Raoul Boughton, Ryan S Miller, Nathan P Snow, Kurt C Vercauteren, Kim M Pepin, George Wittemyer","doi":"10.1186/s40462-023-00435-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Contact among animals is crucial for various ecological processes, including social behaviors, disease transmission, and predator-prey interactions. However, the distribution of contact events across time and space is heterogeneous, influenced by environmental factors and biological purposes. Previous studies have assumed that areas with abundant resources and preferred habitats attract more individuals and, therefore, lead to more contact. To examine the accuracy of this assumption, we used a use-available framework to compare landscape factors influencing the location of contacts between wild pigs (Sus scrofa) in two study areas in Florida and Texas (USA) from those influencing non-contact space use. We employed a contact-resource selection function (RSF) model, where contact locations were defined as used points and locations without contact as available points. By comparing outputs from this contact RSF with a general, population-level RSF, we assessed the factors driving both habitat selection and contact. We found that the landscape predictors (e.g., wetland, linear features, and food resources) played different roles in habitat selection from contact processes for wild pigs in both study areas. This indicated that pigs interacted with their landscapes differently when choosing habitats compared to when they encountered other individuals. Consequently, relying solely on the spatial overlap of individual or population-level RSF models may lead to a misleading understanding of contact-related ecology. Our findings challenge prevailing assumptions about contact and introduce innovative approaches to better understand the ecological drivers of spatially explicit contact. By accurately predicting the spatial distribution of contact events, we can enhance our understanding of contact based ecological processes and their spatial dynamics.</p>","PeriodicalId":54288,"journal":{"name":"Movement Ecology","volume":"11 1","pages":"74"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687890/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Individual-level patterns of resource selection do not predict hotspots of contact.\",\"authors\":\"Anni Yang, Raoul Boughton, Ryan S Miller, Nathan P Snow, Kurt C Vercauteren, Kim M Pepin, George Wittemyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40462-023-00435-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Contact among animals is crucial for various ecological processes, including social behaviors, disease transmission, and predator-prey interactions. However, the distribution of contact events across time and space is heterogeneous, influenced by environmental factors and biological purposes. Previous studies have assumed that areas with abundant resources and preferred habitats attract more individuals and, therefore, lead to more contact. To examine the accuracy of this assumption, we used a use-available framework to compare landscape factors influencing the location of contacts between wild pigs (Sus scrofa) in two study areas in Florida and Texas (USA) from those influencing non-contact space use. We employed a contact-resource selection function (RSF) model, where contact locations were defined as used points and locations without contact as available points. By comparing outputs from this contact RSF with a general, population-level RSF, we assessed the factors driving both habitat selection and contact. We found that the landscape predictors (e.g., wetland, linear features, and food resources) played different roles in habitat selection from contact processes for wild pigs in both study areas. This indicated that pigs interacted with their landscapes differently when choosing habitats compared to when they encountered other individuals. Consequently, relying solely on the spatial overlap of individual or population-level RSF models may lead to a misleading understanding of contact-related ecology. Our findings challenge prevailing assumptions about contact and introduce innovative approaches to better understand the ecological drivers of spatially explicit contact. By accurately predicting the spatial distribution of contact events, we can enhance our understanding of contact based ecological processes and their spatial dynamics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54288,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Movement Ecology\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687890/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Movement Ecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40462-023-00435-9\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Movement Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40462-023-00435-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Individual-level patterns of resource selection do not predict hotspots of contact.
Contact among animals is crucial for various ecological processes, including social behaviors, disease transmission, and predator-prey interactions. However, the distribution of contact events across time and space is heterogeneous, influenced by environmental factors and biological purposes. Previous studies have assumed that areas with abundant resources and preferred habitats attract more individuals and, therefore, lead to more contact. To examine the accuracy of this assumption, we used a use-available framework to compare landscape factors influencing the location of contacts between wild pigs (Sus scrofa) in two study areas in Florida and Texas (USA) from those influencing non-contact space use. We employed a contact-resource selection function (RSF) model, where contact locations were defined as used points and locations without contact as available points. By comparing outputs from this contact RSF with a general, population-level RSF, we assessed the factors driving both habitat selection and contact. We found that the landscape predictors (e.g., wetland, linear features, and food resources) played different roles in habitat selection from contact processes for wild pigs in both study areas. This indicated that pigs interacted with their landscapes differently when choosing habitats compared to when they encountered other individuals. Consequently, relying solely on the spatial overlap of individual or population-level RSF models may lead to a misleading understanding of contact-related ecology. Our findings challenge prevailing assumptions about contact and introduce innovative approaches to better understand the ecological drivers of spatially explicit contact. By accurately predicting the spatial distribution of contact events, we can enhance our understanding of contact based ecological processes and their spatial dynamics.
Movement EcologyAgricultural and Biological Sciences-Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
4.90%
发文量
47
审稿时长
23 weeks
期刊介绍:
Movement Ecology is an open-access interdisciplinary journal publishing novel insights from empirical and theoretical approaches into the ecology of movement of the whole organism - either animals, plants or microorganisms - as the central theme. We welcome manuscripts on any taxa and any movement phenomena (e.g. foraging, dispersal and seasonal migration) addressing important research questions on the patterns, mechanisms, causes and consequences of organismal movement. Manuscripts will be rigorously peer-reviewed to ensure novelty and high quality.