Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32961607›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2020

Habitat selection patterns are density dependent under the ideal free distribution.

Tal Avgar, Gustavo S Betini, John M Fryxell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Glucocorticoids and land cover: a largescale comparative approach to assess a physiological biomarker for avian conservation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Conceptual and methodological advances in habitat-selection modeling: guidelines for ecology and evolution.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2022
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Tal AvgarDepartment of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8764-6976
Gustavo S BetiniDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0707-4128
John M FryxellDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5278-8747

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

EcosystemAnimalsavailability dependencefunctional responseIFD with costsmIFDoptimal foragingpatch choiceRSFSDM

Identifiers

PMID32961607
PMCPMC7756284

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.