Cited by 5

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modeling the Potential Dispersal of Asian Longhorned Beetle Using Circuit Theory

Elmes, Arthur, Rogan, John, Williams, Christopher, Ratick, Samuel, Nowak, David·2019·The Professional Geographer

Abstract

The Asian longhorned beetle (ALB, Anoplophora glabripennis) is an invasive pest species currently infesting major port cities in North America and Europe. There is limited knowledge regarding the pathways of movement across heterogeneous landscapes at local scales. This study models dispersal pathways using circuit theory in Worcester, Massachusetts, which has the largest ongoing ALB infestation in North America. Circuit theory–based dispersal modeling provides a means of predicting the movement of random walkers across a landscape comprising differential resistance to movement. Calibration of landscape resistance to ALB movement used a combined expert opinion and empirical approach, with 820 ALB presence points for calibration and validation. Results indicate that ALB typically uses nonhabitat land-cover types to connect suitable habitat patches. Circuit modeling was a better predictor of spatial patterns of dispersal than least-cost dispersal modeling, especially by predicting narrow corridors that connect large habitat patches. ALB dispersal modeling is difficult due to limited data availability and ongoing ALB habitat modification. This article contributes to knowledge of ALB dispersal patterns at local and regional scales, using empirically driven methods to provide spatially explicit predictions of high dispersal probability and habitat suitability for ALB, using the best data sets available. Key Words: Asian longhorned beetle, circuit theory, invasive species, urban fo…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00330124.2019.1611458

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 61

  1. 10.1016/S0038-092X(00)00089-X · DOI
  2. 10.1007/BF00132860 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.07.005 · DOI
  4. 10.1111/j.1570-7458.2005.00320.x · DOI
  5. 10.1890/08-1898.1 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01716.x · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01550.x · DOI
  8. 10.1674/0003-0031(2003)150[0001:AOSPAS · DOI
  9. 10.1023/A:1026062530600 · DOI
  10. Danko J. J. V., 2016, The Northeastern Geographer, 8, 1
  11. 10.1139/x11-097 · DOI
  12. Doyle P. G., 2000, American Mathematical Monthly, 94, 202
  13. 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120159 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2017.04.011 · DOI
  15. 10.1371/journal.pone.0088293 · DOI
  16. 10.1111/afe.12096 · DOI
  17. 10.1111/eea.12292 · DOI
  18. 10.1139/x05-249 · DOI
  19. Haack R. A., 2006, Great Lakes Entomologist, 39, 169
  20. 10.1146/annurev-ento-112408-085427 · DOI
  21. 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01480.x · DOI · Paper page
  22. Herwitz E, 2001, Trees at risk: Reclaiming an urban forest. A case history of Worcester, Massachusetts
  23. 10.1080/2150704X.2013.852704 · DOI
  24. 10.1111/j.1461-9563.2009.00443.x · DOI
  25. Huebner C. D, 2003, Castanea, 68, 1
  26. Junbao W., 1998, Acta Ecologica Sinica, 18, 269
  27. 10.1007/s10530-017-1398-0 · DOI
  28. 10.1603/0046-225X-35.4.912 · DOI
  29. 10.2307/2845770 · DOI
  30. Liebhold A. M., 1995, Forest Science Monograph, 30, 49
  31. 10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091401 · DOI
  32. 10.1078/1618-8667-00025 · DOI
  33. 10.1093/jipm/pmv003 · DOI
  34. 10.1007/s10530-008-9420-1 · DOI
  35. 10.1603/EN14049 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019 · DOI
  37. 10.1016/j.envpol.2014.05.028 · DOI
  38. 10.1603/0022-0493-94.1.116 · DOI
  39. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.01.009 · DOI
  40. 10.1093/condor/103.3.599 · DOI
  41. 10.1086/378926 · DOI
  42. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.10.002 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Poland T. M, 1998, Newsletter of the Michigan Entomological Society, 43, 15
  44. Raupp M. J., 2006, Arboriculture and Urban Forestry, 32, 297, 10.48044/jauf.2006.038 · DOI
  45. 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01907.x · DOI
  46. Santos R., 2012, Massachusetts Asian longhorned beetle cooperative eradication program determines next steps for eradication efforts in Worcester County
  47. 10.1080/10106049.2015.1086901 · DOI
  48. Singleton, P. H., and W. L. Gaines. 2002.Landscape permeability for large carnivores in Washington: A geographic information system weighted-distance and least-cost corridor assessment.Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest. · DOI
  49. 10.1093/biomet/38.1-2.196 · DOI
  50. 10.1603/0046-225X-30.6.1036 · DOI
  51. 10.1603/0046-225X-33.2.435 · DOI
  52. 10.1007/s10021-003-0092-5 · DOI
  53. 10.1111/afe.12160 · DOI
  54. 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01600.x · DOI
  55. 10.1007/s10530-015-0961-9 · DOI
  56. 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00854.x · DOI
  57. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.11.010 · DOI · Paper page
  58. 10.1603/0046-225X-33.3.540 · DOI
  59. 10.1023/B:UECO.0000004828.05143.67 · DOI
  60. 10.1007/s10980-012-9737-0 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Zhou J., 1984, Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 20, 372

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Elmes, A., Rogan, J., Williams, C., Ratick, S., & Nowak, D.
Affiliations
  • Clark University
  • USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station
Venue
The Professional Geographer
Published
2019-07-12
Volume
71
Issue
4
Pages
580-594
ISSN
  • 0033-0124
  • 1467-9272
Cited by
5
References
3
Language
en

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