Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 358

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Removing GPS collar bias in habitat selection studies

Frair, Jacqueline L., Nielsen, Scott E., Merrill, Evelyn H., Lele, Subhash R., Boyce, Mark S., Munro, Robin H. M., Stenhouse, Gordon B., Beyer, Hawthorne L.·2004·Journal of Applied Ecology

Abstract

Summary: Compared to traditional radio‐collars, global positioning system (GPS) collars provide finer spatial resolution and collect locations across a broader range of spatial and temporal conditions. However, data from GPS collars are biased because vegetation and terrain interfere with the satellite signals necessary to acquire a location. Analyses of habitat selection generally proceed without correcting for this known sampling bias. We documented the effects of bias in resource selection functions (RSF) and compared the effectiveness of two bias‐correction techniques. The effects of environmental conditions on the probability of a GPS collar collecting a location were modelled for three brands of collar using data collected in 24‐h trials at 194 test locations. The best‐supported model was used to create GPS‐biased data from unbiased animal locations. These data were used to assess the effects of bias given data losses in the range of 10–40% at both 1‐ and 6‐h sampling intensities. We compared the sign, value and significance of coefficients derived using biased and unbiased data. With 6‐h locations we observed type II error rates of 30–40% given as little as a 10% data loss. Biased data also produced coefficients that were significantly more negative than unbiased estimates. Increasing the sampling intensity from 6‐ to 1‐h locations eliminated type II errors but increased the magnitude of coefficient bias. No type I errors or changes in sign were observed. We applied sample weighting and iterative simulation given a 30% data loss. For a biased vegetation type, simulation reduced more type II errors than weighting, most probably because the original sample size was re‐established. However, selection for areas near trails, which was influenced by a biased vegetation type, showed fewer type II errors after weighting existing animal locations than after simulation. Both techniques corrected 100% and ≥ 80% of the biased coefficients at the 6‐ and 1‐h sampling intensities, respectively. Synthesis and applications. This study demonstrates that GPS error is predictable and biases the coefficients of resource selection models dependant upon the GPS sampling intensity and the level of data loss. We provide effective alternatives for correcting bias and discuss applying corrections under different sampling designs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00902.x

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 358

Metadata

Authors
Frair, J. L., Nielsen, S. E., Merrill, E. H., Lele, S. R., Boyce, M. S., Munro, R. H. M., Stenhouse, G. B., & Beyer, H. L.
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-04
Volume
41
Issue
2
Pages
201-212
ISSN
  • 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2664
OpenAlex
W2117835647
Cited by
358
References
6
FWCI
18.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Removing GPS collar bias in habitat selection studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00902.x
The paper
Frair, J. L., Nielsen, S. E., Merrill, E. H., Lele, S. R., Boyce, M. S., Munro, R. H. M., Stenhouse, G. B., & Beyer, H. L. (2004). Removing GPS collar bias in habitat selection studies. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-8901.2004.00902.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.