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
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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.”
From Connectivity modelling in conservation science: a comparative evaluation (2022) · cites this paper as [49]
Citations
Cites
The socioecology of elephants: analysis of the processes creating multitiered social structures
Wittemyer, G., Douglas-Hamilton, I., & Getz, W. M. (2005) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.08.018 · Cited by 591
Self-citationUnderstanding proboscidean evolution: a formidable task
Shoshani, J. (1998) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(98)01491-8 · Cited by 144
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 39
- Barkham, J. P. and M. E. Rainy. 1976. Vegetation of Samburu-Isiolo Game Reserve. East African Wildlife Journal 14:297–329. · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.01.009 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00548.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s004420051023 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0003546 · DOI
- 10.1017/S1464793104006645 · DOI
- 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
- 10.1890/06-0854.1 · DOI
- 10.1086/589448 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00114-004-0606-9 · DOI
- 10.1038/nature06199 · DOI
- 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1073/pnas.0801737105 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00727.x · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.0801732105 · DOI
- 10.1890/06-1708.1 · DOI
- 10.1086/597229 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF02573958 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00379695 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.fishres.2007.11.002 · DOI
- 10.1016/0169-5347(96)81094-9 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.08.008 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16291.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.tree.2007.10.009 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tree.2005.05.011 · DOI
- 10.1002/env.636 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jembe.2008.01.026 · DOI
- 10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0891:THFATL]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01249.x · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-2419.2003.00228.x · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.0508915103 · DOI
- 10.2307/1941099 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cub.2006.06.049 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2008.08.010 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00265-007-0432-0 · DOI
- 10.1098/rspb.2009.0941 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.0801744105 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.0906-7590.2007.04900.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2009.00568.x · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Connectivity modelling in conservation science: a comparative evaluation
Unnithan Kumar, S., & Cushman, S. A. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-20370-w · Cited by 83
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