Habitat selection patterns are density dependent under the ideal free distribution

Despite being widely used, habitat selection models are rarely reliable and informative when applied across different ecosystems or over time. One possible explanation is that habitat selection is context‐dependent due to variation in consumer density and/or resource availability. The goal of this p...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of animal ecology 2020-12, Vol.89 (12), p.2777-2787
Hauptverfasser: Avgar, Tal, Betini, Gustavo S., Fryxell, John M., Hewison, Mark
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2787
container_issue 12
container_start_page 2777
container_title The Journal of animal ecology
container_volume 89
creator Avgar, Tal
Betini, Gustavo S.
Fryxell, John M.
Hewison, Mark
description Despite being widely used, habitat selection models are rarely reliable and informative when applied across different ecosystems or over time. One possible explanation is that habitat selection is context‐dependent due to variation in consumer density and/or resource availability. The goal of this paper is to provide a general theoretical perspective on the contributory mechanisms of consumer and resource density‐dependent habitat selection, as well as on our capacity to account for their effects. Towards this goal we revisit the ideal free distribution (IFD), where consumers are assumed to be omniscient, equally competitive and freely moving, and are hence expected to instantaneously distribute themselves across a heterogeneous landscape such that fitness is equalised across the population. Although these assumptions are clearly unrealistic to some degree, the simplicity of the structure in IFD provides a useful theoretical vantage point to help clarify our understanding of more complex spatial processes. Of equal importance, IFD assumptions are compatible with the assumptions underlying common habitat selection models. Here we show how a fitness‐maximising space use model, based on IFD, gives rise to resource and consumer density‐dependent shifts in consumer distribution, providing a mechanistic explanation for the context‐dependent outcomes often reported in habitat selection analysis. Our model suggests that adaptive shifts in consumer distribution patterns would be expected to lead to nonlinear and often non‐monotonic patterns of habitat selection. These results indicate that even under the simplest of assumptions about adaptive organismal behaviour, habitat selection strength should critically depend on system‐wide characteristics. Clarifying the impact of adaptive behavioural responses may be pivotal in making meaningful ecological inferences about observed patterns of habitat selection and allow reliable transferability of habitat selection predictions across time and space. A fitness‐maximising space use model gives rise to resource and consumer density‐dependent shifts in consumer distribution, providing a mechanistic explanation for the context‐dependent outcomes often reported in habitat selection analysis. Adaptive shifts in consumer distribution patterns would be expected to lead to nonlinear and often non‐monotonic patterns of habitat selection. These results indicate that even under the simplest of assumptions about adaptive organismal beha
doi_str_mv 10.1111/1365-2656.13352
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7756284</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2467791165</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4682-e3d419071b43ce51e1a7324b7233d5b04f5249938d9387740b2febaaa11a97563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUtLAzEUhYMotj7W7mTAjZupeWdmIxTxSVEQXYfMzB1Nmc7UJKP035vaWtSNgXC4yXcP93IQOiJ4ROI5I0yKlEohR4QxQbfQcPOyjYYYU5JmKscDtOf9FGOsKGa7aMBoLonEaogeb0xhgwmJhwbKYLs2mZsQwLU-MQ6SClpvwyLqHNpYhKSP4pLwComtwDRJ7SBi1gdni35pcIB2atN4OFzrPnq-uny6uEknD9e3F-NJWnKZ0RRYxUmOFSk4K0EQIEYxygtFGatEgXktKM9zllXxKsVxQWsojDGEmFwJyfbR-cp33hczqMo4nDONnjs7M26hO2P175_WvuqX7l2r2E0zHg1O1waue-vBBz2zvoSmMS10vdeUc8FpxgSL6MkfdNr1ro3rRUoqlRMiRaTOVlTpOu8d1JthCNbLvPQyHb1MR3_lFTuOf-6w4b8DioBcAR-2gcV_fvpufH-5cv4EZAKfuA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2467791165</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Habitat selection patterns are density dependent under the ideal free distribution</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Wiley Online Library Free Content</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Avgar, Tal ; Betini, Gustavo S. ; Fryxell, John M. ; Hewison, Mark</creator><creatorcontrib>Avgar, Tal ; Betini, Gustavo S. ; Fryxell, John M. ; Hewison, Mark</creatorcontrib><description>Despite being widely used, habitat selection models are rarely reliable and informative when applied across different ecosystems or over time. One possible explanation is that habitat selection is context‐dependent due to variation in consumer density and/or resource availability. The goal of this paper is to provide a general theoretical perspective on the contributory mechanisms of consumer and resource density‐dependent habitat selection, as well as on our capacity to account for their effects. Towards this goal we revisit the ideal free distribution (IFD), where consumers are assumed to be omniscient, equally competitive and freely moving, and are hence expected to instantaneously distribute themselves across a heterogeneous landscape such that fitness is equalised across the population. Although these assumptions are clearly unrealistic to some degree, the simplicity of the structure in IFD provides a useful theoretical vantage point to help clarify our understanding of more complex spatial processes. Of equal importance, IFD assumptions are compatible with the assumptions underlying common habitat selection models. Here we show how a fitness‐maximising space use model, based on IFD, gives rise to resource and consumer density‐dependent shifts in consumer distribution, providing a mechanistic explanation for the context‐dependent outcomes often reported in habitat selection analysis. Our model suggests that adaptive shifts in consumer distribution patterns would be expected to lead to nonlinear and often non‐monotonic patterns of habitat selection. These results indicate that even under the simplest of assumptions about adaptive organismal behaviour, habitat selection strength should critically depend on system‐wide characteristics. Clarifying the impact of adaptive behavioural responses may be pivotal in making meaningful ecological inferences about observed patterns of habitat selection and allow reliable transferability of habitat selection predictions across time and space. A fitness‐maximising space use model gives rise to resource and consumer density‐dependent shifts in consumer distribution, providing a mechanistic explanation for the context‐dependent outcomes often reported in habitat selection analysis. Adaptive shifts in consumer distribution patterns would be expected to lead to nonlinear and often non‐monotonic patterns of habitat selection. These results indicate that even under the simplest of assumptions about adaptive organismal behaviour, habitat selection strength should critically depend on system‐wide characteristics. Clarifying the impact of adaptive behavioural responses may be pivotal in making meaningful ecological inferences about observed patterns of habitat selection and allow us to reliably transfer habitat selection predictions across time and space.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8790</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2656</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.13352</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32961607</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Adaptive systems ; Animal behavior ; Animals ; availability dependence ; Context ; Density ; Distribution patterns ; Ecosystem ; Fitness ; functional response ; Habitat selection ; Habitats ; IFD with costs ; mIFD ; optimal foraging ; patch choice ; Resource availability ; RSF ; SDM ; Spatial Ecology</subject><ispartof>The Journal of animal ecology, 2020-12, Vol.89 (12), p.2777-2787</ispartof><rights>2020 The Authors. published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society</rights><rights>2020 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.</rights><rights>2020. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4682-e3d419071b43ce51e1a7324b7233d5b04f5249938d9387740b2febaaa11a97563</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4682-e3d419071b43ce51e1a7324b7233d5b04f5249938d9387740b2febaaa11a97563</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0707-4128 ; 0000-0002-5278-8747 ; 0000-0002-8764-6976</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2F1365-2656.13352$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2F1365-2656.13352$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,1411,1427,27901,27902,45550,45551,46384,46808</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32961607$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Avgar, Tal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Betini, Gustavo S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fryxell, John M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hewison, Mark</creatorcontrib><title>Habitat selection patterns are density dependent under the ideal free distribution</title><title>The Journal of animal ecology</title><addtitle>J Anim Ecol</addtitle><description>Despite being widely used, habitat selection models are rarely reliable and informative when applied across different ecosystems or over time. One possible explanation is that habitat selection is context‐dependent due to variation in consumer density and/or resource availability. The goal of this paper is to provide a general theoretical perspective on the contributory mechanisms of consumer and resource density‐dependent habitat selection, as well as on our capacity to account for their effects. Towards this goal we revisit the ideal free distribution (IFD), where consumers are assumed to be omniscient, equally competitive and freely moving, and are hence expected to instantaneously distribute themselves across a heterogeneous landscape such that fitness is equalised across the population. Although these assumptions are clearly unrealistic to some degree, the simplicity of the structure in IFD provides a useful theoretical vantage point to help clarify our understanding of more complex spatial processes. Of equal importance, IFD assumptions are compatible with the assumptions underlying common habitat selection models. Here we show how a fitness‐maximising space use model, based on IFD, gives rise to resource and consumer density‐dependent shifts in consumer distribution, providing a mechanistic explanation for the context‐dependent outcomes often reported in habitat selection analysis. Our model suggests that adaptive shifts in consumer distribution patterns would be expected to lead to nonlinear and often non‐monotonic patterns of habitat selection. These results indicate that even under the simplest of assumptions about adaptive organismal behaviour, habitat selection strength should critically depend on system‐wide characteristics. Clarifying the impact of adaptive behavioural responses may be pivotal in making meaningful ecological inferences about observed patterns of habitat selection and allow reliable transferability of habitat selection predictions across time and space. A fitness‐maximising space use model gives rise to resource and consumer density‐dependent shifts in consumer distribution, providing a mechanistic explanation for the context‐dependent outcomes often reported in habitat selection analysis. Adaptive shifts in consumer distribution patterns would be expected to lead to nonlinear and often non‐monotonic patterns of habitat selection. These results indicate that even under the simplest of assumptions about adaptive organismal behaviour, habitat selection strength should critically depend on system‐wide characteristics. Clarifying the impact of adaptive behavioural responses may be pivotal in making meaningful ecological inferences about observed patterns of habitat selection and allow us to reliably transfer habitat selection predictions across time and space.</description><subject>Adaptive systems</subject><subject>Animal behavior</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>availability dependence</subject><subject>Context</subject><subject>Density</subject><subject>Distribution patterns</subject><subject>Ecosystem</subject><subject>Fitness</subject><subject>functional response</subject><subject>Habitat selection</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>IFD with costs</subject><subject>mIFD</subject><subject>optimal foraging</subject><subject>patch choice</subject><subject>Resource availability</subject><subject>RSF</subject><subject>SDM</subject><subject>Spatial Ecology</subject><issn>0021-8790</issn><issn>1365-2656</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUtLAzEUhYMotj7W7mTAjZupeWdmIxTxSVEQXYfMzB1Nmc7UJKP035vaWtSNgXC4yXcP93IQOiJ4ROI5I0yKlEohR4QxQbfQcPOyjYYYU5JmKscDtOf9FGOsKGa7aMBoLonEaogeb0xhgwmJhwbKYLs2mZsQwLU-MQ6SClpvwyLqHNpYhKSP4pLwComtwDRJ7SBi1gdni35pcIB2atN4OFzrPnq-uny6uEknD9e3F-NJWnKZ0RRYxUmOFSk4K0EQIEYxygtFGatEgXktKM9zllXxKsVxQWsojDGEmFwJyfbR-cp33hczqMo4nDONnjs7M26hO2P175_WvuqX7l2r2E0zHg1O1waue-vBBz2zvoSmMS10vdeUc8FpxgSL6MkfdNr1ro3rRUoqlRMiRaTOVlTpOu8d1JthCNbLvPQyHb1MR3_lFTuOf-6w4b8DioBcAR-2gcV_fvpufH-5cv4EZAKfuA</recordid><startdate>202012</startdate><enddate>202012</enddate><creator>Avgar, Tal</creator><creator>Betini, Gustavo S.</creator><creator>Fryxell, John M.</creator><creator>Hewison, Mark</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><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>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0707-4128</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5278-8747</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8764-6976</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202012</creationdate><title>Habitat selection patterns are density dependent under the ideal free distribution</title><author>Avgar, Tal ; Betini, Gustavo S. ; Fryxell, John M. ; Hewison, Mark</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4682-e3d419071b43ce51e1a7324b7233d5b04f5249938d9387740b2febaaa11a97563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Adaptive systems</topic><topic>Animal behavior</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>availability dependence</topic><topic>Context</topic><topic>Density</topic><topic>Distribution patterns</topic><topic>Ecosystem</topic><topic>Fitness</topic><topic>functional response</topic><topic>Habitat selection</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>IFD with costs</topic><topic>mIFD</topic><topic>optimal foraging</topic><topic>patch choice</topic><topic>Resource availability</topic><topic>RSF</topic><topic>SDM</topic><topic>Spatial Ecology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Avgar, Tal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Betini, Gustavo S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fryxell, John M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hewison, Mark</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>The Journal of animal ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Avgar, Tal</au><au>Betini, Gustavo S.</au><au>Fryxell, John M.</au><au>Hewison, Mark</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Habitat selection patterns are density dependent under the ideal free distribution</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of animal ecology</jtitle><addtitle>J Anim Ecol</addtitle><date>2020-12</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>89</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>2777</spage><epage>2787</epage><pages>2777-2787</pages><issn>0021-8790</issn><eissn>1365-2656</eissn><abstract>Despite being widely used, habitat selection models are rarely reliable and informative when applied across different ecosystems or over time. One possible explanation is that habitat selection is context‐dependent due to variation in consumer density and/or resource availability. The goal of this paper is to provide a general theoretical perspective on the contributory mechanisms of consumer and resource density‐dependent habitat selection, as well as on our capacity to account for their effects. Towards this goal we revisit the ideal free distribution (IFD), where consumers are assumed to be omniscient, equally competitive and freely moving, and are hence expected to instantaneously distribute themselves across a heterogeneous landscape such that fitness is equalised across the population. Although these assumptions are clearly unrealistic to some degree, the simplicity of the structure in IFD provides a useful theoretical vantage point to help clarify our understanding of more complex spatial processes. Of equal importance, IFD assumptions are compatible with the assumptions underlying common habitat selection models. Here we show how a fitness‐maximising space use model, based on IFD, gives rise to resource and consumer density‐dependent shifts in consumer distribution, providing a mechanistic explanation for the context‐dependent outcomes often reported in habitat selection analysis. Our model suggests that adaptive shifts in consumer distribution patterns would be expected to lead to nonlinear and often non‐monotonic patterns of habitat selection. These results indicate that even under the simplest of assumptions about adaptive organismal behaviour, habitat selection strength should critically depend on system‐wide characteristics. Clarifying the impact of adaptive behavioural responses may be pivotal in making meaningful ecological inferences about observed patterns of habitat selection and allow reliable transferability of habitat selection predictions across time and space. A fitness‐maximising space use model gives rise to resource and consumer density‐dependent shifts in consumer distribution, providing a mechanistic explanation for the context‐dependent outcomes often reported in habitat selection analysis. Adaptive shifts in consumer distribution patterns would be expected to lead to nonlinear and often non‐monotonic patterns of habitat selection. These results indicate that even under the simplest of assumptions about adaptive organismal behaviour, habitat selection strength should critically depend on system‐wide characteristics. Clarifying the impact of adaptive behavioural responses may be pivotal in making meaningful ecological inferences about observed patterns of habitat selection and allow us to reliably transfer habitat selection predictions across time and space.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>32961607</pmid><doi>10.1111/1365-2656.13352</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0707-4128</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5278-8747</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8764-6976</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-8790
ispartof The Journal of animal ecology, 2020-12, Vol.89 (12), p.2777-2787
issn 0021-8790
1365-2656
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7756284
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Wiley Online Library Free Content; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
subjects Adaptive systems
Animal behavior
Animals
availability dependence
Context
Density
Distribution patterns
Ecosystem
Fitness
functional response
Habitat selection
Habitats
IFD with costs
mIFD
optimal foraging
patch choice
Resource availability
RSF
SDM
Spatial Ecology
title Habitat selection patterns are density dependent under the ideal free distribution
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T20%3A52%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Habitat%20selection%20patterns%20are%20density%20dependent%20under%20the%20ideal%20free%20distribution&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20animal%20ecology&rft.au=Avgar,%20Tal&rft.date=2020-12&rft.volume=89&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=2777&rft.epage=2787&rft.pages=2777-2787&rft.issn=0021-8790&rft.eissn=1365-2656&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1365-2656.13352&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2467791165%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2467791165&rft_id=info:pmid/32961607&rfr_iscdi=true