Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 620

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Applications of step-selection functions in ecology and conservation

Open access
Thurfjell, Henrik, Ciuti, Simone, Boyce, Mark S·2014·Movement Ecology
DOI 10.1186/2051-3933-2-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Recent progress in positioning technology facilitates the collection of massive amounts of sequential spatial data on animals. This has led to new opportunities and challenges when investigating animal movement behaviour and habitat selection. Tools like Step Selection Functions (SSFs) are relatively new powerful models for studying resource selection by animals moving through the landscape. SSFs compare environmental attributes of observed steps (the linear segment between two consecutive observations of position) with alternative random steps taken from the same starting point. SSFs have been used to study habitat selection, human-wildlife interactions, movement corridors, and dispersal behaviours in animals. SSFs also have the potential to depict resource selection at multiple spatial and temporal scales. There are several aspects of SSFs where consensus has not yet been reached such as how to analyse the data, when to consider habitat covariates along linear paths between observations rather than at their endpoints, how many random steps should be considered to measure availability, and how to account for individual variation. In this review we aim to address all these issues, as well as to highlight weak features of this modelling approach that should be developed by further research. Finally, we suggest that SSFs could be integrated with state-space models to classify behavioural states when estimating SSFs.

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 · 10.1186/2051-3933-2-4

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 64

  1. Tomkiewicz SM, Fuller MR, Kie JG, Bates KK: Global positioning system and associated technologies in animal behaviour and ecological research. Philos T R Soc B 2010, 365:2163–2176. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Cagnacci F, Boitani L, Powell RA, Boyce MS: Animal ecology meets GPS-based radiotelemetry: a perfect storm of opportunities and challenges. Philos T R Soc B 2010, 365:2157–2162. · DOI · Paper page
  3. Frair JL, Fieberg J, Hebblewhite M, Cagnacci F, DeCesare NJ, Pedrotti L: Resolving issues of imprecise and habitat-biased locations in ecological analyses using GPS telemetry data. Philos T R Soc B 2010, 365:2187–2200. · DOI · Paper page
  4. Fieberg J, Matthiopoulos J, Hebblewhite M, Boyce MS, Frair JL: Correlation and studies of habitat selection: problem, red herring or opportunity? Philos T R Soc B 2010, 365:2233–2244. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Gaillard JM, Hebblewhite M, Loison A, Fuller M, Powell R, Basille M, Van Moorter B: Habitat-performance relationships: finding the right metric at a given spatial scale. Philos T R Soc B 2010, 365:2255–2265. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Manly BF, McDonald LL, Thomas DL, McDonald TL, Erickson WP: Resource selection by animals: statistical design and analysis for field studies. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2002.
  7. Boyce MS: Scale for resource selection functions. Divers Distrib 2006, 12:269–276. · DOI · Paper page
  8. Hebblewhite M, Merrill E: Modelling wildlife-human relationships for social species with mixed-effects resource selection models. J Appl Ecol 2008, 45:834–844. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Lele SR: A new method for estimation of resource selection probability function. Journal Widl Manag 2009, 73:122–127.
  10. Ryan PG, Petersen SL, Peters G, Gremillet D: GPS tracking a marine predator: the effects of precision, resolution and sampling rate on foraging tracks of African Penguins. Mar Biol 2004, 145:215–223. · DOI
  11. Matthiopoulos J, Hebblewhite M, Aarts G, Fieberg J: Generalized functional responses for species distributions. Ecology 2011, 92:583–589. · DOI
  12. Johnson CJ, Gillingham MP: Sensitivity of species-distribution models to error, bias, and model design: an application to resource selection functions for woodland caribou. Ecol Model 2008, 213:143–155. · DOI
  13. Moorcroft PR, Lewis MA, Crabtree RL: Mechanistic home range models capture spatial patterns and dynamics of coyote territories in Yellowstone. P Roy Soc 2006, 273:1651–1659. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Chetkiewicz CLB, Clair CCS, Boyce MS: Corridors for conservation: integrating pattern and process. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 2006, 37:317–342. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Squires JR, DeCesare NJ, Olson LE, Kolbe JA, Hebblewhite M, Parks SA: Combining resource selection and movement behavior to predict corridors for Canada lynx at their southern range periphery. Biol Conserv 2013, 157:187–195. · DOI
  16. Roever CL, Boyce MS, Stenhouse GB: Grizzly bear movements relative to roads: application of step selection functions. Ecography 2010, 33:1113–1122. · DOI
  17. Lele SR, Keim JL: Weighted distributions and estimation of resource selection probability functions. Ecology 2006, 87:3021–3028. · DOI
  18. Johnson DS, Thomas DL, Hoef JMV, Christ A: A general framework for the analysis of animal resource selection from telemetry data. Biometrics 2008, 64:968–976. · DOI
  19. Forester JD, Im HK, Rathouz PJ: Accounting for animal movement in estimation of resource selection functions: sampling and data analysis. Ecology 2009, 90:3554–3565. · DOI · Paper page
  20. Turchin P: Quantitative analysis of movement: measuring and modelling population reditribution in animals and plants. Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA: Sinauer Associates; 1998.
  21. Dickson BG, Jenness JS, Beier P: Influence of vegetation, topography, and roads on cougar movement in southern California. J Wildl Manag 2005, 69:264–276. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Richard Y, Armstrong DP: Cost distance modelling of landscape connectivity and gap-crossing ability using radio-tracking data. J Appl Ecol 2010, 47:603–610. · DOI
  23. Leblond M, Dussault C, Ouellet JP: What drives fine-scale movements of large herbivores? A case study using moose. Ecography 2010, 33:1102–1112. · DOI · Paper page
  24. Latham ADM, Latham MC, Boyce MS, Boutin S: Movement responses by wolves to industrial linear features and their effect on woodland caribou in northeastern Alberta. Ecol Appl 2011, 21:2854–2865. · DOI · Paper page
  25. van Beest FM, Van Moorter B, Milner JM: Temperature-mediated habitat use and selection by a heat-sensitive northern ungulate. Anim Behav 2012, 84:723–735. · DOI
  26. Northrup JM, Pitt J, Muhly TB, Stenhouse GB, Musiani M, Boyce MS: Vehicle traffic shapes grizzly bear behaviour on a multiple-use landscape. J Appl Ecol 2012, 49:1159–1167. · DOI
  27. Hodson J, Fortin D, Belanger L: Fine-scale disturbances shape space-use patterns of a boreal forest herbivore. J Mammal 2010, 91:607–619. · DOI
  28. Johnson DH: The comparision of usage and availability measurements for evaluating resource preference. Ecology 1980, 61:65–71. · DOI · Paper page
  29. Kittle AM, Fryxell JM, Desy GE, Hamr J: The scale-dependent impact of wolf predation risk on resource selection by three sympatric ungulates. Oecologia 2008, 157:163–175. · DOI
  30. Boyce MS, Mao JS, Merrill EH, Fortin D, Turner MG, Fryxell J, Turchin P: Scale and heterogeneity in habitat selection by elk in Yellowstone National Park. Ecoscience 2003, 10:421–431. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Godvik IMR, Loe LE, Vik JO, Veiberg V, Langvatn R, Mysterud A: Temporal scales, trade-offs, and functional responses in red deer habitat selection. Ecology 2009, 90:699–710. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Nielsen SE, Boyce MS, Stenhouse GB: Grizzly bears and forestry I. Selection of clearcuts by grizzly bears in west-central Alberta, Canada. Forest Ecol Manag 2004, 199:51–65. · DOI
  33. Pettorelli N, Gaillard JM, Yoccoz NG, Duncan P, Maillard D, Delorme D, Van Laere G, Toigo C: The response of fawn survival to changes in habitat quality varies according to cohort quality and spatial scale. J Anim Ecol 2005, 74:972–981. · DOI
  34. DeCesare NJ, Hebblewhite M, Schmiegelow F, Hervieux D, McDermid GJ, Neufeld L, Bradley M, Whittington J, Smith KG, Morgantini LE, et al.: Transcending scale dependence in identifying habitat with resource selection functions. Ecol Appl 2012, 22:1068–1083. · DOI
  35. Olivier F, Wotherspoon SJ: Nest selection by snow petrels Pagodroma nivea in East Antarctica - Validating predictive habitat selection models at the continental scale. Ecol Model 2008, 210:414–430. · DOI
  36. Bowyer RT, Kie JG, VanBallenberghe V: Sexual segregation in black-tailed deer: effects of scale. J Wildlife Manag 1996, 60:10–17. · DOI
  37. Arthur SM, Manly BFJ, MacDonald LL, Garner GW: Assessing habitat selection when availability changes. Ecology 1996, 77:215–227. · DOI · Paper page
  38. Nams VO: Sampling animal movement paths causes turn autocorrelation. Acta Biotheor 2013, 61:269–284. · doi:10.1007/s10441-013-9182-8
  39. Anderson KE, Nisbet RM, Diehl S, Cooper SD: Scaling population responses to spatial environmental variability in advection-dominated systems. Ecol Lett 2005, 8:933–943. · DOI
  40. Mysterud A, Lian LB, Hjermann DO: Scale-dependent trade-offs in foraging by European roe deer ( Capreolus capreolus ) during winter. Can J Zool 1999, 77:1486–1493. · doi:10.1139/cjz-77-9-1486
  41. Jerde CL, Visscher DR: GPS measurement error influences on movement model parameterization. Ecol Appl 2005, 15:806–810. · doi:10.1890/04-0895
  42. Fortin M-J, James PMA, MacKenzie A, Melles SJ, Rayfield B: Spatial statistics, spatial regression, and graph theory in ecology. Spatial Stat 2012, 1:100–109. · DOI · Paper page
  43. Morales JM, Haydon DT, Frair J, Holsiner KE, Fryxell JM: Extracting more out of relocation data: building movement models as mixtures of random walks. Ecology 2004, 85:2436–2445. · DOI · Paper page
  44. Northrup JM, Hooten MB, Anderson CR, Wittemyer G: Practical guidance on characterizing availability in resource selection functions under a use–availability design. Ecology 2013, 94:1456–1463. · DOI · Paper page
  45. Coulon A, Morellet N, Goulard M, Cargnelutti B, Angibault JM, Hewison AJM: Inferring the effects of landscape structure on roe deer ( Capreolus capreolus ) movements using a step selection function. Landscape Ecol 2008, 23:603–614. · DOI
  46. Gillies CS, Beyer HL, St Clair CC: Fine-scale movement decisions of tropical forest birds in a fragmented landscape. Ecol Appl 2011, 21:944–954. · DOI
  47. Thurfjell H, Ball JP, Ahlen PA, Kornacher P, Dettki H, Sjoberg K: Habitat use and spatial patterns of wild boar Sus scrofa (L.): agricultural fields and edges. Eur J Wildlife Res 2009, 55:517–523. · DOI
  48. Eriksen A, Wabakken P, Zimmermann B, Andreassen HP, Arnemo JM, Gundersen H, Milner JM, Liberg O, Linnell J, Pedersen HC, et al.: Encounter frequencies between GPS-collared wolves ( Canis lupus ) and moose ( Alces alces ) in a Scandinavian wolf territory. Ecol Res 2009, 24:547–557. · DOI
  49. Duchesne T, Fortin D, Courbin N: Mixed conditional logistic regression for habitat selection studies. J Anim Ecol 2010, 79:548–555. · DOI · Paper page
  50. Revelt D, Train K: Mixed logit with repeated choices: households' choices of appliance efficiency level. Rev Econ Stat 1998, 80:647–657. · DOI · Paper page
  51. Wolf M, Weissing FJ: Animal personalities: consequences for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 2012, 27:452–461. · DOI · Paper page
  52. Bolnick DI, Svanback R, Fordyce JA, Yang LH, Davis JM, Hulsey CD, Forister ML: The ecology of individuals: incidence and implications of individual specialization. Am Nat 2003, 161:1–28. · DOI · Paper page
  53. Nielson SE, Boyce MS, Stenhouse GB, Munro RHM: Modeling grizzly bear habitats in the Yellowhead Ecosystem of Alberta: taking autocorrelation seriously. Ursus 2002, 13:45–56.
  54. Sawyer H, Nielson RM, Lindzey F, McDonald LL: Winter habitat selection of mule deer before and during development of a natural gas field. J Wildlife Manag 2006, 70:396–403. · DOI · Paper page
  55. De Solla SR, Bonduriansky R, Brooks RJ: Eliminating autocorrelation reduces biological relevance of home range estimates. J Anim Ecol 1999, 68:221–234. · DOI · Paper page
  56. Boyce MS, Vernier PR, Nielsen SE, Schmiegelow FKA: Evaluating resource selection functions. Ecol Model 2002, 157:281–300. · DOI · Paper page
  57. Guisan A, Theurillat JP, Kienast F: Predicting the potential distribution of plant species in an Alpine environment. J Veg Sci 1998, 9:65–74. · DOI · Paper page
  58. Pearce J, Ferrier S: Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression. Ecol Model 2000, 133:225–245. · DOI · Paper page
  59. Johnson CJ, Nielsen SE, Merrill EH, Mcdonald TL, Boyce MS: Resource selection functions based on use-availability data: theoretical motivation and evaluation methods. J Wildl Manag 2006, 70:347–357. · DOI · Paper page
  60. Hirzel AH, Le Lay G, Helfer V, Randin C, Guisan A: Evaluating the ability of habitat suitability models to predict species presences. Ecol Model 2006, 199:142–152. · DOI · Paper page
  61. Bjorneraas K, Solberg EJ, Herfindal I, Van Moorter B, Rolandsen CM, Tremblay JP, Skarpe C, Saether BE, Eriksen R, Astrup R: Moose Alces alces habitat use at multiple temporal scales in a human-altered landscape. Wildl Biol 2011, 17:44–54. · DOI
  62. Morellet N, Van Moorter B, Cargnelutti B, Angibault JM, Lourtet B, Merlet J, Ladet S, Hewison AJM: Landscape composition influences roe deer habitat selection at both home range and landscape scales. Landscape Ecol 2011, 26:999–1010. · DOI
  63. Johnson CJ, Parker KL, Heard DC, Gillingham MP: Movement parameters of ungulates and scale-specific responses to the environment. J Anim Ecol 2002, 71:225–235. · DOI · Paper page
  64. Jonsen ID, Flenming JM, Myers RA: Robust state-space modeling of animal movement data. Ecology 2005, 86:2874–2880. · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 620

Metadata

Authors
Thurfjell, H., Ciuti, S., & Boyce, M. S.
Venue
Movement Ecology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2014-02-07
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
4-4
ISSN
2051-3933 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/2051-3933-2-4
OpenAlex
W2146793276
Cited by
620
References
2
FWCI
26.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 (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

How to cite

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

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Applications of step-selection functions in ecology and conservation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/2051-3933-2-4
The paper
Thurfjell, H., Ciuti, S., & Boyce, M. S. (2014). Applications of step-selection functions in ecology and conservation. Movement Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1186/2051-3933-2-4

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.