CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 173

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Habitat suitability is a poor proxy for landscape connectivity during dispersal and mating movements

Keeley, Annika T.H., Beier, Paul, Keeley, Brian W., Fagan, Matthew E.·2017·Landscape and Urban Planning
DOI 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.01.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.01.007

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Circuit theory is particularly appropriate when the assumption of moving individuals having limited knowledge of the surrounding landscape is met.

    “Circuit theory is particularly appropriate when the assumption of moving individuals having limited knowledge of the surrounding landscape is met (McClure et al. 2016; Keeley et al. 2017; Maiorano et al. 2017).”

    From Circuit‐theory applications to connectivity science and conservation (2019) · cites this paper as Keeley et al. 2017

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Abrahms, 2016, Does wildlife resource selection accurately inform corridor conservation?, Journal of Applied Ecology
  2. Agnarsson, 2011, A time-calibrated species-level phylogeny of bats Chiroptera, Mammalia, PLoS Currents, 3
  3. Beier, 2008, Forks in the road: Choices in procedures for designing wildland linkages, Conservation Biology, 22, 836, 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00942.x · DOI · Paper page
  4. Blazquez-Cabrera, 2016, Influence of separating home range and dispersal movements on characterizing corridors and effective distances, Landscape Ecology, 31, 2355, 10.1007/s10980-016-0407-5 · DOI
  5. Bowman, 2002, Dispersal distance of mammals is proportional to home range size, Ecology, 83, 2049, 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2049:DDOMIP]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  6. Calcagno, 2010, glmulti: An R package for easy automated model selection with (generalized) linear models, Journal of Statistical Software, 34, 1, 10.18637/jss.v034.i12 · DOI
  7. Compton, 2002, Habitat selection by wood turtles (Clemmys insculpta): An application of paired logistic regression, Ecology, 83, 833, 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[0833:HSBWTC]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  8. Cushman, 2006, Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on amphibians: A review and prospectus, Biological Conservation, 128, 231, 10.1016/j.biocon.2005.09.031 · DOI
  9. Doerr, 2011, Connectivity, dispersal behaviour and conservation under climate change: A response to Hodgson et al, Journal of Applied Ecology, 48, 143, 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01899.x · DOI
  10. Edelman, 2014, Multiple socioecological factors influence timing of natal dispersal in kangaroo rats, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 68, 1123, 10.1007/s00265-014-1723-x · DOI
  11. Elliot, 2014, The devil is in the dispersers: Predictions of landscape connectivity change with demography, Journal of Applied Ecology, 51, 1169, 10.1111/1365-2664.12282 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Fagan, 2013, Land cover dynamics following a deforestation ban in northern Costa Rica, Environmental Research Letters, 8, 10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034017 · DOI
  13. Ford, 1988, Potos flavus, Mammalian Species, 321, 1, 10.2307/3504086 · DOI
  14. Gaston, 2016, Response to agriculture by a woodland species depends on cover type and behavioural state: Insights from resident and dispersing Iberian lynx, Journal of Applied Ecology, 53, 814, 10.1111/1365-2664.12629 · DOI
  15. Graves, 2014, Estimating landscape resistance to dispersal, Landscape Ecology, 29, 1201, 10.1007/s10980-014-0056-5 · DOI
  16. Hadfield, 2006, Towards unbiased parentage assignment: Combining genetic, behavioural and spatial data in a Bayesian framework, Molecular Ecology, 15, 3715, 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.03050.x · DOI
  17. Kalendar, 2011, Java web tools for PCR, in silico PCR, and oligonucleotide assembly and analysis, Genomics, 98, 137, 10.1016/j.ygeno.2011.04.009 · DOI
  18. Kays, 2001, The social organization of the kinkajou Potos flavus (Procyonidae), Journal of Zoology, 253, 491, 10.1017/S0952836901000450 · DOI
  19. Kays, 2000, Microsatellite analysis of kinkajou social organization, Molecular Ecology, 9, 743, 10.1046/j.1365-294x.2000.00921.x · DOI
  20. Keeley, 2016, Estimating landscape resistance from habitat suitability: Effects of data source and nonlinearities, Landscape Ecology, 1
  21. Koprowski, 2002, Handling tree squirrels with a safe and efficient restraint, Wildlife Society Bulletin, 30, 101
  22. Lees, 2009, Gap-crossing movements predict species occupancy in Amazonian forest fragments, Oikos, 118, 280, 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2008.16842.x · DOI
  23. Lewis, 2007, Effects of habitat on GPS collar performance: Using data screening to reduce location error, Journal of Applied Ecology, 44, 663, 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01286.x · DOI
  24. Li, 2009, Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform, Bioinformatics, 25, 1754, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Li, 2009, The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools, Bioinformatics, 25, 2078, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Mateo-Sanchez, 2015, A comparative framework to infer landscape effects on population genetic structure: Are habitat suitability models effective in explaining gene flow?, Landscape Ecology, 30, 1405, 10.1007/s10980-015-0194-4 · DOI
  27. McKenna, 2010, The genome analysis toolkit: A MapReduce framework for analyzing next-generation DNA sequencing data, Genome Research, 20, 1297, 10.1101/gr.107524.110 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Milne, 2013, Using Tablet for visual exploration of second-generation sequencing data, Briefings in Bioinformatics, 14, 193, 10.1093/bib/bbs012 · DOI
  29. Murphy, 2007, The impact of time and field conditions on brown bear (Ursus arctos) faecal DNA amplification, Conservation Genetics, 8, 1219, 10.1007/s10592-006-9264-0 · DOI
  30. Nowakowski, 2015, Evaluating connectivity for tropical amphibians using empirically derived resistance surfaces, Ecological Applications, 25, 928, 10.1890/14-0833.1 · DOI
  31. Peterman, 2014, Ecological resistance surfaces predict fine-scale genetic differentiation in a terrestrial woodland salamander, Molecular Ecology, 23, 2402, 10.1111/mec.12747 · DOI
  32. Pfeiffer, 2005, X- and Y-chromosome specific variants of the amelogenin gene allow sex determination in sheep (Ovis aries) and European red deer (Cervus elaphus), BMC Genetics, 6, 10.1186/1471-2156-6-16 · DOI
  33. Pinho, 2014, Kinship and social behavior of lowland tapirs (Tapirus terrestris) in a Central Amazon landscape, Public Library Of Science, 9
  34. Reding, 2013, Linking movement behavior and fine-scale genetic structure to model landscape connectivity for bobcats (Lynx rufus), Landscape Ecology, 28, 471, 10.1007/s10980-012-9844-y · DOI
  35. Reinhardt, 2005, Low dispersal ability and habitat specificity promote extinctions in rare but not in widespread species: The Orthoptera of Germany, Ecography, 28, 593, 10.1111/j.2005.0906-7590.04285.x · DOI
  36. Ronce, 2007, How does it feel to be like a rolling stone? Ten questions about dispersal evolution, Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics, 38, 231, 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.38.091206.095611 · DOI
  37. Sawyer, 2011, Placing linkages among fragmented habitats: Do least-cost models reflect how animals use landscapes?, Journal of Applied Ecology, 48, 668, 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.01970.x · DOI
  38. Short Bull, 2011, Why replication is important in landscape genetics: American black bear in the Rocky Mountains, Molecular Ecology, 20, 1092, 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04944.x · DOI
  39. Spear, 2010, Use of resistance surfaces for landscape genetic studies: Considerations for parameterization and analysis, Molecular Ecology, 19, 3576, 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04657.x · DOI · Paper page
  40. Taylor, 1993, Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure, Oikos, 68, 571, 10.2307/3544927 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Trainor, 2013, Empirical estimation of dispersal resistance surfaces: A case study with red-cockaded woodpeckers, Landscape Ecology, 28, 755, 10.1007/s10980-013-9861-5 · DOI
  42. Trakhtenbrot, 2005, The importance of long-distance dispersal in biodiversity conservation, Diversity and Distributions, 11, 173, 10.1111/j.1366-9516.2005.00156.x · DOI
  43. Waser, 2011, How much can parentage analyses tell us about precapture dispersal?, Molecular Ecology, 20, 1277, 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05002.x · DOI
  44. Wasserman, 2010, Spatial scaling and multi-model inference in landscape genetics: Martes americana in Northern Idaho, Landscape Ecology, 25, 1601, 10.1007/s10980-010-9525-7 · DOI
  45. Zeller, 2012, Estimating landscape resistance to movement: A review, Landscape Ecology, 27, 777, 10.1007/s10980-012-9737-0 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Zeller, 2014, Sensitivity of landscape resistance estimates based on point selection functions to scale and behavioral state: Pumas as a case study, Landscape Ecology, 29, 541, 10.1007/s10980-014-9991-4 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Zeller, 2016, Using step and path selection functions for estimating resistance to movement: Pumas as a case study, Landscape Ecology, 31, 1319, 10.1007/s10980-015-0301-6 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Keeley, A. T. H., Beier, P., Keeley, B. W., & Fagan, M. E.
ORCID
Keeley, Annika T.H.
Venue
Landscape and Urban Planning
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-05
Volume
161
Pages
90-102
ISSN
0169-2046
DOI
10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.01.007
Cited by
173
References
1
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review