Back

Multiple imputation step-selection analysis: Improving estimation accuracy of travel distance accounting for route uncertainty

Takeshige, S.; Ohkubo, Y.

2026-02-24 ecology
10.64898/2026.02.23.707585 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Understanding animal movement behavior is essential for conservation and elucidating various ecological processes. In particular, assessing habitat selection is a central theme in movement ecology, traditionally evaluated by estimating travel distances per unit time across diverse environmental conditions based on tracking data. Integrated step selection analysis (iSSA : Avgar et al., 2016) has been most widely applied in conservation studies and ecosystem service quantifications due to its ease of implementation and interpretability. Despite its popularity, however, iSSA faces a critical issue since it can lead to an underestimation of the travel distance per unit time, potentially biasing estimates of step length. This is primarily due to the assumption of linear interpolation between consecutive observed points, which fails to account for the unobserved locations and the actual, non-linear trajectories taken by the animal. In this paper, we proposed a novel method to improve the estimation of travel distance in iSSA, inspired by multiple imputation, which is a statistical method for missing data. We conducted a simulation study to evaluate the extent to which our proposed method, Multiple Imputation Step Selection Analysis (MiSSA), improves the accuracy of step-length estimation (parameters of gamma distribution) compared to conventional iSSA. In simulation studies across various scenarios, MiSSA estimated the step length more accurately than iSSA. Our study demonstrates that incorporating missing data statistics into the iSSA framework improves the accuracy of travel distance estimations, which serve as the foundation for evaluating habitat selection. MiSSA maintains the core advantages of iSSA while enabling more accurate estimation of travel distances, even with low-resolution data where movement between sampling intervals is non-linear. We anticipate its broad application across various disciplines, with a primary focus on conservation.

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%
21.7%
2
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.7%
3
Movement Ecology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.9%
4
Ecological Informatics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.7%
5
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.1%
6
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.8%
50% of probability mass above
7
Ecology
70 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
8
Landscape Ecology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
9
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
10
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.0%
11
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.8%
12
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 47%
2.3%
13
Journal of Applied Ecology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.0%
14
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.0%
15
Ecosphere
53 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
16
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.7%
17
Animal Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
18
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
19
Ecological Applications
28 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
20
Journal of Animal Ecology
63 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
21
Journal of Biogeography
37 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
22
Ecological Modelling
24 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
23
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
24
Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
25
Diversity and Distributions
26 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
26
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.7%
27
Oecologia
23 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
28
Conservation Science and Practice
13 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
29
Ecological Indicators
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%
30
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 28%
0.6%