Cited by 38

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

Inferring ecological and behavioral drivers of African elephant movement using a linear filtering approach

Boettiger, Alistair N., Wittemyer, George, Starfield, Richard, Volrath, Fritz, Douglas-Hamilton, Iain, Getz, Wayne M.·2011·Ecology

Abstract

Understanding the environmental factors influencing animal movements is fundamental to theoretical and applied research in the field of movement ecology. Studies relating fine-scale movement paths to spatiotemporally structured landscape data, such as vegetation productivity or human activity, are particularly lacking despite the obvious importance of such information to understanding drivers of animal movement. In part, this may be because few approaches provide the sophistication to characterize the complexity of movement behavior and relate it to diverse, varying environmental stimuli. We overcame this hurdle by applying, for the first time to an ecological question, a finite impulse-response signal-filtering approach to identify human and natural environmental drivers of movements of 13 free-ranging African elephants (Loxodonta africana) from distinct social groups collected over seven years. A minimum mean-square error (MMSE) estimation criterion allowed comparison of the predictive power of landscape and ecological model inputs. We showed that a filter combining vegetation dynamics, human and physical landscape features, and previous movement outperformed simpler filter structures, indicating the importance of both dynamic and static landscape features, as well as habit, on movement decisions taken by elephants. Elephant responses to vegetation productivity indices were not uniform in time or space, indicating that elephant foraging strategies are more complex than simp…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1890/10-0106.1

Cites

2 of 2 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?

  • Traditional movement models which ignore the complexities of human influence on animal behaviour for the sake of theoretical and algorithmic simplicity are growing increasingly unreliable.

    “Since ecological processes in reality do not follow a neat distinction between ‘nature’ and ‘society’7,47,48, traditional movement models which ignore the complexities of human influence on animal behaviour for the sake of theoretical and algorithmic simplicity are growing increasingly unreliable49–51.”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Barkham, J. P. and M. E. Rainy. 1976. Vegetation of Samburu-Isiolo Game Reserve. East African Wildlife Journal 14:297–329. · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.01.009 · DOI
  3. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00548.x · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1007/s004420051023 · DOI
  5. 10.1371/journal.pone.0003546 · DOI
  6. 10.1017/S1464793104006645 · DOI
  7. Cerling, T. E. G. Wittemyer, J. R. Ehleringer, C. H. Remien, and I. Douglas-Hamilton. 2009. History of Animals using Isotope Records (HAIR): A 6-year dietary history of one family of African elephants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106:8093–8100. · DOI
  8. 10.1890/06-0854.1 · DOI
  9. 10.1086/589448 · DOI
  10. 10.1007/s00114-004-0606-9 · DOI
  11. 10.1038/nature06199 · DOI
  12. 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1073/pnas.0801737105 · DOI
  14. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00727.x · DOI
  15. 10.1073/pnas.0801732105 · DOI
  16. 10.1890/06-1708.1 · DOI
  17. 10.1086/597229 · DOI
  18. 10.1007/BF02573958 · DOI
  19. 10.1007/BF00379695 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1016/j.fishres.2007.11.002 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/0169-5347(96)81094-9 · DOI
  22. 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.08.008 · DOI
  23. 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16291.x · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1016/j.tree.2007.10.009 · DOI
  25. 10.1016/j.tree.2005.05.011 · DOI
  26. 10.1002/env.636 · DOI
  27. 10.1016/j.jembe.2008.01.026 · DOI
  28. 10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0891:THFATL]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  29. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01249.x · DOI
  30. 10.1046/j.1365-2419.2003.00228.x · DOI
  31. 10.1073/pnas.0508915103 · DOI
  32. 10.2307/1941099 · DOI
  33. 10.1016/j.cub.2006.06.049 · DOI
  34. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2008.08.010 · DOI
  35. 10.1007/s00265-007-0432-0 · DOI
  36. 10.1098/rspb.2009.0941 · DOI
  37. 10.1073/pnas.0801744105 · DOI
  38. 10.1111/j.0906-7590.2007.04900.x · DOI
  39. 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2009.00568.x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Boettiger, A. N., Wittemyer, G., Starfield, R., Volrath, F., Douglas-Hamilton, I., & Getz, W. M.
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-08
Volume
92
Issue
8
Pages
1648-1657
ISSN
0012-9658
Cited by
38
References
2
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