ReviewMovement ecology2025
An introduction to statistical models used to characterize species-habitat associations with animal movement data.
Review in Movement ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Offshore wind farm avoidance by a discard-feeding seabird is independent of local fishing activity.The Journal of animal ecology · 2026Article
- Including Fitness and Health Proxies Can Alter Our Understanding of Habitat Selection.Ecology letters · 2026Review
- The fence interface effect: how altered herbivore movement creates a soil bacterial diversity hotspot.Movement ecology · 2026Article
- Top-Down and Bottom-Up Processes Jointly Explain Mesopredator Movement and Foraging Ecology.Ecology letters · 2026Article
- Resource use and associated energy expenditure of African crowned eagles (Conservation physiology · 2026Article
- Puma habitat preferences when moving and feeding predict the potential for human-carnivore conflict in shared landscapes.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding species-habitat associations is fundamental to ecological sciences and for species conservation. Consequently, various statistical approaches have been designed to infer species-habitat associations. Due to their conceptual and mathematical differences, these methods can yield contrasting results. In this paper, we describe and compare commonly used statistical models that relate animal movement data to environmental data. Specifically, we examined selection functions which include resource selection function (RSF) and step-selection function (SSF), as well as hidden Markov models (HMMs) and related methods such as state-space models. We demonstrate differences in assumptions while highlighting advantages and limitations of each method. Additionally, we provide guidance on selecting the most appropriate statistical method based on the scale of the data and intended inference. To illustrate the varying ecological insights derived from each statistical model, we apply them to the movement track of a single ringed seal (Pusa hispida) in a case study. Through our case study, we demonstrate that each model yields varying ecological insights. For example, while the selection coefficient values from RSFs appear to show a stronger positive relationship with prey diversity than those of the SSFs, when we accounted for the autocorrelation in the data none of these relationships with prey diversity were statistically significant. Furthermore, the HMM reveals variable associations with prey diversity across different behaviors, for example, a positive relationship between prey diversity and a slow-movement behaviour. Notably, the three models identified different "important" areas. This case study highlights the critical significance of selecting the appropriate model as an essential step in the process of identifying species-habitat relationships and specific areas of importance. Our comprehensive review provides the foundational information required for making informed decisions when choosing the most suitable statistical methods to address specific questions, such as identifying expansive corridors or protected zones, understanding movement patterns, or studying behaviours. In addition, this study informs researchers with the necessary tools to apply these methods effectively.
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.