Dataset from: Are we telling the same story? Comparing inferences made from camera trap and telemetry data for wildlife monitoring
Estimating habitat and spatial associations for wildlife is common across ecological studies, and it is well known that individual traits can drive population dynamics and vice versa. Thus, it is commonly assumed that individual- and population-level data should represent the same underlying process...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Dataset |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Estimating habitat and spatial associations for wildlife is common across
ecological studies, and it is well known that individual traits can drive
population dynamics and vice versa. Thus, it is commonly assumed that
individual- and population-level data should represent the same underlying
processes, but few studies have directly compared contemporaneous data
representing these different perspectives. We evaluated the circumstances
under which data collected from Lagrangian (individual-level) and Eulerian
(population-level) perspectives could yield comparable inferences in an
effort to understand how scalable information is from the individual to
the population. We used Global Positioning System (GPS) collar
(Lagrangian) and camera trap (Eularian) data for seven species collected
simultaneously in eastern Washington (2018 – 2020) to compare inferences
made from different survey perspectives. We fit the respective data
streams to resource selection functions (RSFs) and occupancy models and
compared estimated habitat- and space-use patterns for each species.
Although previous studies have considered whether individual- and
population-level data generated comparable information, ours is the first
to make this comparison for multiple species simultaneously and to
specifically ask whether inferences from the two perspectives differ
depending on the focal species. We found general agreement between the
predicted spatial distributions for most paired analyses, though specific
habitat relationships differed. We hypothesized the discrepancies arose
due to differences in statistical power associated with camera and
GPS-collar sampling, as well as spatial mismatches in the data. Our
research suggests data collected from individual-based sampling methods
can capture coarse population-wide patterns for a diversity of species,
but results differ when interpreting specific wildlife-habitat
relationships. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.5061/dryad.g4f4qrfsv |