Back

Multilevel multinomial models as a tool to extract population spatial networks from capture-recapture data

Bonnell, T.; Michaud, R.; Dupuch, A.; Lesage, V.; Chion, C.

2021-06-24 ecology
10.1101/2021.05.06.442957 bioRxiv
Show abstract

O_LIEstimating the impacts of anthropogenic disturbances requires an understanding of the habitat use patterns of individuals within a population. This is especially the case when disturbances are localized within a populations spatial range, as variation in habitat-use within a population can drastically alter the distribution of impacts. C_LIO_LIHere, we illustrate the potential for multilevel multinomial models to generate spatial networks from capture-recapture data, a common data source use in wildlife studies to monitor population dynamics and habitat use. These spatial networks capture which regions of a populations spatial distribution share similar/dissimilar individual usage patterns, and can be especially useful for detecting structured habitat use within the populations spatial range. C_LIO_LIUsing simulations and 18 years of capture-recapture data from St. Lawrence Estuary (SLE) beluga, we show that this approach can successfully estimate the magnitude of similarities/dissimilarities in individual usage patterns across sectors, and identify sectors that share similar individual usage patterns that differ from other sectors, i.e., structured habitat use. In the case of SLE beluga, this method identified multiple clusters of individuals, each preferentially using restricted areas within their summer range of the SLE. C_LIO_LISynthesis and applications. Multilevel multinomial models can be effective at estimating spatial structure in habitat use within wildlife populations sampled by capture-recapture of individuals. Our finding of a structured habitat use within the SLE beluga summer range has direct implications for estimating individual exposures to localized stressors, such as underwater noise from shipping or other activities. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
18.5%
2
Movement Ecology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.3%
3
Ecological Applications
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.3%
4
Ecological Informatics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
5
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 6%
6.2%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 29%
6.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
3.6%
9
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.0%
10
Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.0%
11
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 44%
2.7%
12
Ecosphere
53 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
13
Journal of Animal Ecology
63 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
14
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
15
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.2%
16
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.2%
17
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
18
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 52%
0.9%
19
Landscape Ecology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
20
Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
21
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
22
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
23
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 35%
0.7%
24
Conservation Letters
11 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
25
Environmental Research Letters
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%
26
Ecology
70 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%