ArticleMovement ecology2017
A cross-validation-based approach for delimiting reliable home range estimates.
Article in Movement ecology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Variation in herbivore space use: comparing two savanna ecosystems with different anthrax outbreak patterns in southern Africa.Movement ecology · 2023Article
- Residency and space use estimation methods based on passive acoustic telemetry data.Movement ecology · 2023Review
- A framework for integrating inferred movement behavior into disease risk models.Movement ecology · 2022Article
- ModelingInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Review
- Ecological metrics and methods for GPS movement data.International journal of geographical information science : IJGIS · 2018Article
- Commentary to: a cross-validation-based approach for delimiting reliable home range estimates.Movement ecology · 2018Article
- Decoupling environmental effects and host population dynamics for anthrax, a classic reservoir-driven disease.PloS one · 2018Article
- Correction to: A cross-validation-based approach for delimiting reliable home range estimates.Movement ecology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith decreasing costs of GPS telemetry devices, data repositories of animal movement paths are increasing almost exponentially in size. A series of complex statistical tools have been developed in conjunction with this increase in data. Each of these methods offers certain improvements over previously proposed methods, but each has certain assumptions or shortcomings that make its general application difficult. In the case of the recently developed Time Local Convex Hull (T-LoCoH) method, the subjectivity in parameter selection serves as one of the primary impediments to its more widespread use. While there are certain advantages to the flexibility it offers for question-driven research, the lack of an objective approach for parameter selection may prevent some users from exploring the benefits of the method.
methodsHere we present a cross-validation-based approach for selecting parameter values to optimize the T-LoCoH algorithm. We demonstrate the utility of the approach using a case study from the Etosha National Park anthrax system.
resultsUtilizing the proposed algorithm, rather than the guidelines in the T-LoCoH documentation, results in significantly different values for derived site fidelity metrics.
conclusionsDue to its basis in principles of cross-validation, the application of this method offers a more objective approach than the relatively subjective guidelines set forth in the T-LoCoH documentation and enables a more accurate basis for the comparison of home ranges among individuals and species, as well as among studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.