Demographic Costs Associated with Differences in Habitat Space Occupancy
Delimiting the habitat characteristics describing the environmental conditions required by a species has become a critical tool for predicting organismal responses to environmental change. Grinnell emphasized the effects of environmental factors on the ability of a population to maintain a positive...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2016-11, Vol.11 (11), p.e0165472-e0165472 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | e0165472 |
---|---|
container_issue | 11 |
container_start_page | e0165472 |
container_title | PloS one |
container_volume | 11 |
creator | Williams, Kelly A Miles, Donald B |
description | Delimiting the habitat characteristics describing the environmental conditions required by a species has become a critical tool for predicting organismal responses to environmental change. Grinnell emphasized the effects of environmental factors on the ability of a population to maintain a positive growth rate, yet few studies have included demographic or reproductive data in analyses of the Grinnellian niche. Identifying differences in habitat exploitation patterns in response to structural variation in the environment presents an incomplete description of the ability of species to adapt to changing habitats if demographic traits are not included. We estimated the vegetation characteristics used by individuals within a population of hooded warblers (Setophaga citrina) across a spatial transect that includes three structurally different forest habitats. We predicted individuals should select similar structural characteristics within each habitat and have similar reproductive success across sample sites. In the two years post burn, adults were present but no young fledged indicating the habitat requirements necessary for reproduction were absent in this habitat. We found significant differences in habitat space occupied by individuals in unaltered and harvested habitats. Nesting habitats used by female warblers differed from available habitat. Fledging success was lower in the harvested habitat 10 to 12 years post-harvest. In the harvested habitat, fledging success was greater on mesic slopes but decreased along a habitat gradient to xeric ridgetops, suggesting compensation in habitat use does not ameliorate fitness costs. In contrast, there was no difference in the number of fledged young along this gradient in the unaltered habitat. Based solely on occupancy data, traditional ecological niche models would incorrectly conclude the environmental characteristics found across the three forested habitats are included in the Grinnellian niche of the hooded warbler. However, examination of demographic and environmental data simultaneously allows differentiation between occupied habitat space and niche space. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0165472 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1841158367</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A471866323</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_818a5eb73dc94166954d51d77366d6a8</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A471866323</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c725t-9627c3f803170b4bb9cc90d868b643d047ae18d466c40e5cdb940006e55d748f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk1tv0zAUxyMEYhf4BggiIU3w0GLH17wgVR3QSpMqMeDVcmyndZXGme0A-_a4azY1aA-TH2wd_87fx-eSZW8gmELE4Ket630rm2nnWjMFkBLMimfZKSxRMaEFQM-PzifZWQhbAAjilL7MTgrGCWS4OM0Wl2bn1l52G6vyuQsx5LMQnLIyGp3_sXGTX9q6Nt60yoTctvlCVjbKmF93Upl8pVTfyVbdvspe1LIJ5vWwn2c_v375MV9MrlbflvPZ1USxgsRJSQumUM0BggxUuKpKpUqgOeUVxUgDzKSBXGNKFQaGKF2VGABADSGaYV6j8-zdQbdrXBBDEoKAHENIOKIsEcsDoZ3cis7bnfS3wkkr7gzOr4X00arGCA65JKZiSKsSQ0pLgjWBmjFEqaaSJ63Pw2t9tTNamTZ62YxExzet3Yi1-y0IhAXHJAl8GAS8u-lNiGJngzJNI1vj-ru4KYYYp1I9AYUQoYLsw3r_H_p4IgZqLdNfbVu7FKLai4oZZjC1AipQoqaPUGlps7MqNVdtk33k8HHkkJho_sa17EMQy-vvT2dXv8bsxRG7MbKJm-CaPlrXhjGID6DyLgRv6od6QCD2s3GfDbGfDTHMRnJ7e1zLB6f7YUD_AHxkBmA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1841158367</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Demographic Costs Associated with Differences in Habitat Space Occupancy</title><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Williams, Kelly A ; Miles, Donald B</creator><creatorcontrib>Williams, Kelly A ; Miles, Donald B</creatorcontrib><description>Delimiting the habitat characteristics describing the environmental conditions required by a species has become a critical tool for predicting organismal responses to environmental change. Grinnell emphasized the effects of environmental factors on the ability of a population to maintain a positive growth rate, yet few studies have included demographic or reproductive data in analyses of the Grinnellian niche. Identifying differences in habitat exploitation patterns in response to structural variation in the environment presents an incomplete description of the ability of species to adapt to changing habitats if demographic traits are not included. We estimated the vegetation characteristics used by individuals within a population of hooded warblers (Setophaga citrina) across a spatial transect that includes three structurally different forest habitats. We predicted individuals should select similar structural characteristics within each habitat and have similar reproductive success across sample sites. In the two years post burn, adults were present but no young fledged indicating the habitat requirements necessary for reproduction were absent in this habitat. We found significant differences in habitat space occupied by individuals in unaltered and harvested habitats. Nesting habitats used by female warblers differed from available habitat. Fledging success was lower in the harvested habitat 10 to 12 years post-harvest. In the harvested habitat, fledging success was greater on mesic slopes but decreased along a habitat gradient to xeric ridgetops, suggesting compensation in habitat use does not ameliorate fitness costs. In contrast, there was no difference in the number of fledged young along this gradient in the unaltered habitat. Based solely on occupancy data, traditional ecological niche models would incorrectly conclude the environmental characteristics found across the three forested habitats are included in the Grinnellian niche of the hooded warbler. However, examination of demographic and environmental data simultaneously allows differentiation between occupied habitat space and niche space.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165472</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27851742</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Adults ; Analysis ; Animal behavior ; Animals ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Birds ; Bradypodion pumilum ; Breeding success ; Data processing ; Demographics ; Demography ; Ecological niches ; Ecology and Environmental Sciences ; Ecosystem ; Environmental changes ; Environmental conditions ; Environmental effects ; Environmental factors ; Exploitation ; Female ; Fitness ; Forests ; Growth rate ; Habitat changes ; Habitat utilization ; Habitats ; Male ; Nesting ; Nesting Behavior ; Niches (Ecology) ; Occupancy ; Reproduction ; Reproduction - physiology ; Reproductive fitness ; Setophaga ; Setophaga citrina ; Songbirds - physiology ; Territoriality</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2016-11, Vol.11 (11), p.e0165472-e0165472</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2016 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2016 Williams, Miles. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2016 Williams, Miles 2016 Williams, Miles</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c725t-9627c3f803170b4bb9cc90d868b643d047ae18d466c40e5cdb940006e55d748f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c725t-9627c3f803170b4bb9cc90d868b643d047ae18d466c40e5cdb940006e55d748f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5112845/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5112845/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2096,2915,23845,27901,27902,53766,53768,79569,79570</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27851742$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Williams, Kelly A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miles, Donald B</creatorcontrib><title>Demographic Costs Associated with Differences in Habitat Space Occupancy</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Delimiting the habitat characteristics describing the environmental conditions required by a species has become a critical tool for predicting organismal responses to environmental change. Grinnell emphasized the effects of environmental factors on the ability of a population to maintain a positive growth rate, yet few studies have included demographic or reproductive data in analyses of the Grinnellian niche. Identifying differences in habitat exploitation patterns in response to structural variation in the environment presents an incomplete description of the ability of species to adapt to changing habitats if demographic traits are not included. We estimated the vegetation characteristics used by individuals within a population of hooded warblers (Setophaga citrina) across a spatial transect that includes three structurally different forest habitats. We predicted individuals should select similar structural characteristics within each habitat and have similar reproductive success across sample sites. In the two years post burn, adults were present but no young fledged indicating the habitat requirements necessary for reproduction were absent in this habitat. We found significant differences in habitat space occupied by individuals in unaltered and harvested habitats. Nesting habitats used by female warblers differed from available habitat. Fledging success was lower in the harvested habitat 10 to 12 years post-harvest. In the harvested habitat, fledging success was greater on mesic slopes but decreased along a habitat gradient to xeric ridgetops, suggesting compensation in habitat use does not ameliorate fitness costs. In contrast, there was no difference in the number of fledged young along this gradient in the unaltered habitat. Based solely on occupancy data, traditional ecological niche models would incorrectly conclude the environmental characteristics found across the three forested habitats are included in the Grinnellian niche of the hooded warbler. However, examination of demographic and environmental data simultaneously allows differentiation between occupied habitat space and niche space.</description><subject>Adults</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Animal behavior</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Bradypodion pumilum</subject><subject>Breeding success</subject><subject>Data processing</subject><subject>Demographics</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Ecological niches</subject><subject>Ecology and Environmental Sciences</subject><subject>Ecosystem</subject><subject>Environmental changes</subject><subject>Environmental conditions</subject><subject>Environmental effects</subject><subject>Environmental factors</subject><subject>Exploitation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fitness</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>Growth rate</subject><subject>Habitat changes</subject><subject>Habitat utilization</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Nesting</subject><subject>Nesting Behavior</subject><subject>Niches (Ecology)</subject><subject>Occupancy</subject><subject>Reproduction</subject><subject>Reproduction - physiology</subject><subject>Reproductive fitness</subject><subject>Setophaga</subject><subject>Setophaga citrina</subject><subject>Songbirds - physiology</subject><subject>Territoriality</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk1tv0zAUxyMEYhf4BggiIU3w0GLH17wgVR3QSpMqMeDVcmyndZXGme0A-_a4azY1aA-TH2wd_87fx-eSZW8gmELE4Ket630rm2nnWjMFkBLMimfZKSxRMaEFQM-PzifZWQhbAAjilL7MTgrGCWS4OM0Wl2bn1l52G6vyuQsx5LMQnLIyGp3_sXGTX9q6Nt60yoTctvlCVjbKmF93Upl8pVTfyVbdvspe1LIJ5vWwn2c_v375MV9MrlbflvPZ1USxgsRJSQumUM0BggxUuKpKpUqgOeUVxUgDzKSBXGNKFQaGKF2VGABADSGaYV6j8-zdQbdrXBBDEoKAHENIOKIsEcsDoZ3cis7bnfS3wkkr7gzOr4X00arGCA65JKZiSKsSQ0pLgjWBmjFEqaaSJ63Pw2t9tTNamTZ62YxExzet3Yi1-y0IhAXHJAl8GAS8u-lNiGJngzJNI1vj-ru4KYYYp1I9AYUQoYLsw3r_H_p4IgZqLdNfbVu7FKLai4oZZjC1AipQoqaPUGlps7MqNVdtk33k8HHkkJho_sa17EMQy-vvT2dXv8bsxRG7MbKJm-CaPlrXhjGID6DyLgRv6od6QCD2s3GfDbGfDTHMRnJ7e1zLB6f7YUD_AHxkBmA</recordid><startdate>20161116</startdate><enddate>20161116</enddate><creator>Williams, Kelly A</creator><creator>Miles, Donald B</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQGLB</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20161116</creationdate><title>Demographic Costs Associated with Differences in Habitat Space Occupancy</title><author>Williams, Kelly A ; Miles, Donald B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c725t-9627c3f803170b4bb9cc90d868b643d047ae18d466c40e5cdb940006e55d748f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adults</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Animal behavior</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Bradypodion pumilum</topic><topic>Breeding success</topic><topic>Data processing</topic><topic>Demographics</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Ecological niches</topic><topic>Ecology and Environmental Sciences</topic><topic>Ecosystem</topic><topic>Environmental changes</topic><topic>Environmental conditions</topic><topic>Environmental effects</topic><topic>Environmental factors</topic><topic>Exploitation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fitness</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>Growth rate</topic><topic>Habitat changes</topic><topic>Habitat utilization</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Nesting</topic><topic>Nesting Behavior</topic><topic>Niches (Ecology)</topic><topic>Occupancy</topic><topic>Reproduction</topic><topic>Reproduction - physiology</topic><topic>Reproductive fitness</topic><topic>Setophaga</topic><topic>Setophaga citrina</topic><topic>Songbirds - physiology</topic><topic>Territoriality</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Williams, Kelly A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miles, Donald B</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health & Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Williams, Kelly A</au><au>Miles, Donald B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Demographic Costs Associated with Differences in Habitat Space Occupancy</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2016-11-16</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>e0165472</spage><epage>e0165472</epage><pages>e0165472-e0165472</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Delimiting the habitat characteristics describing the environmental conditions required by a species has become a critical tool for predicting organismal responses to environmental change. Grinnell emphasized the effects of environmental factors on the ability of a population to maintain a positive growth rate, yet few studies have included demographic or reproductive data in analyses of the Grinnellian niche. Identifying differences in habitat exploitation patterns in response to structural variation in the environment presents an incomplete description of the ability of species to adapt to changing habitats if demographic traits are not included. We estimated the vegetation characteristics used by individuals within a population of hooded warblers (Setophaga citrina) across a spatial transect that includes three structurally different forest habitats. We predicted individuals should select similar structural characteristics within each habitat and have similar reproductive success across sample sites. In the two years post burn, adults were present but no young fledged indicating the habitat requirements necessary for reproduction were absent in this habitat. We found significant differences in habitat space occupied by individuals in unaltered and harvested habitats. Nesting habitats used by female warblers differed from available habitat. Fledging success was lower in the harvested habitat 10 to 12 years post-harvest. In the harvested habitat, fledging success was greater on mesic slopes but decreased along a habitat gradient to xeric ridgetops, suggesting compensation in habitat use does not ameliorate fitness costs. In contrast, there was no difference in the number of fledged young along this gradient in the unaltered habitat. Based solely on occupancy data, traditional ecological niche models would incorrectly conclude the environmental characteristics found across the three forested habitats are included in the Grinnellian niche of the hooded warbler. However, examination of demographic and environmental data simultaneously allows differentiation between occupied habitat space and niche space.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>27851742</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0165472</doi><tpages>e0165472</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
ispartof | PloS one, 2016-11, Vol.11 (11), p.e0165472-e0165472 |
issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_plos_journals_1841158367 |
source | Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
subjects | Adults Analysis Animal behavior Animals Biology and Life Sciences Birds Bradypodion pumilum Breeding success Data processing Demographics Demography Ecological niches Ecology and Environmental Sciences Ecosystem Environmental changes Environmental conditions Environmental effects Environmental factors Exploitation Female Fitness Forests Growth rate Habitat changes Habitat utilization Habitats Male Nesting Nesting Behavior Niches (Ecology) Occupancy Reproduction Reproduction - physiology Reproductive fitness Setophaga Setophaga citrina Songbirds - physiology Territoriality |
title | Demographic Costs Associated with Differences in Habitat Space Occupancy |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T18%3A08%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Demographic%20Costs%20Associated%20with%20Differences%20in%20Habitat%20Space%20Occupancy&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Williams,%20Kelly%20A&rft.date=2016-11-16&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=e0165472&rft.epage=e0165472&rft.pages=e0165472-e0165472&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0165472&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA471866323%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1841158367&rft_id=info:pmid/27851742&rft_galeid=A471866323&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_818a5eb73dc94166954d51d77366d6a8&rfr_iscdi=true |