Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29114438›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2017

Assessment of fine-scale resource selection and spatially explicit habitat suitability modelling for a re-introduced tiger (

Mriganka Shekhar Sarkar, Ramesh Krishnamurthy, Jeyaraj A Johnson, Subharanjan Sen, Goutam Kumar Saha

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Tropical dry woodland loss in India since 1880 and its relation to current megafauna distributions.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Can Bengal Tiger (Ecology and evolution · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mriganka Shekhar SarkarDepartment of Landscape Level Planning and Management, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Ramesh KrishnamurthyDepartment of Landscape Level Planning and Management, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Jeyaraj A JohnsonDepartment of Habitat Ecology, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Subharanjan SenMadhya Pradesh Forest Department, Indian Forest Service, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Goutam Kumar SahaDepartment of Zoology, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
University of Calcutta · INWildlife Institute of India · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLarge carnivores influence ecosystem functions at various scales. Thus, their local extinction is not only a species-specific conservation concern, but also reflects on the overall habitat quality and ecosystem value. Species-habitat relationships at fine scale reflect the individuals' ability to procure resources and negotiate intraspecific competition. Such fine scale habitat choices are more pronounced in large carnivores such as tiger (

methodsWe studied nine radio-collared individuals of a successfully reintroduced tiger population in Panna Tiger Reserve, central India, focussing on the species-habitat relationship at fine scales. With 16 eco-geographical variables, we performed Manly's selection ratio and K-select analyses to define population-level and individual-level variation in resource selection, respectively. We analysed the data obtained during the exploratory period of six tigers and during the settled period of eight tigers separately, and compared the consequent results. We further used the settled period characteristics to model and map habitat suitability based on the Mahalanobis D

resultsThere was a clear difference in habitat selection by tigers between the exploratory and the settled period. During the exploratory period, tigers selected dense canopy and bamboo forests, but also spent time near villages and relocated village sites. However, settled tigers predominantly selected bamboo forests in complex terrain, riverine forests and teak-mixed forest, and totally avoided human settlements and agriculture areas. There were individual variations in habitat selection between exploratory and settled periods. Based on threshold limits of habitat selection by the Boyce Index, we established that 83% of core and 47% of buffer areas are now suitable habitats for tiger in this reserve. DISCUSSION: Tiger management often focuses on large-scale measures, but this study for the first time highlights the behaviour and fine-scale individual-specific habitat selection strategies. Such knowledge is vital for management of critical tiger habitats and specifically for the success of reintroduction programs. Our spatially explicit habitat suitability map provides a baseline for conservation planning and optimizing carrying capacity of the tiger population in this reserve.

Indexed as

Habitat selectionHabitat suitabilityK-select analysisLarge carnivoreMahalanobis D2Manly’s selection ratioReintroductionTiger

Identifiers

PMID29114438
PMCPMC5672835
OpenAlexW2765146807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.