Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40506736›Full record

ArticleMovement ecology2025

Considering landscape heterogeneity improves the inference of inter-individual interactions from movement data.

Thibault Fronville, Niels Blaum, Florian Jeltsch, Stephanie Kramer-Schadt, Viktoriia Radchuk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Movement ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Thibault FronvilleDepartment of Ecological Dynamics, Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (IZW), Alfred-Kowalke-Straße 17, 10315, Berlin, Germany. fronville@izw-berlin.de.
Niels BlaumDepartment of Plant Ecology and Nature Conservation, University of Potsdam, Am Mühlenberg 3, 14476, Potsdam, Germany.
Florian JeltschDepartment of Plant Ecology and Nature Conservation, University of Potsdam, Am Mühlenberg 3, 14476, Potsdam, Germany.
Stephanie Kramer-Schadt *Department of Ecological Dynamics, Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (IZW), Alfred-Kowalke-Straße 17, 10315, Berlin, Germany.
Viktoriia Radchuk *Department of Ecological Dynamics, Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (IZW), Alfred-Kowalke-Straße 17, 10315, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnimal movement is influenced by both the physical environment and social environment. The effects of both environments are not independent from each other and identifying whether the resulting movement trajectories are shaped by interactions between individuals or whether they are the result of their physical environment, is important for understanding animal movement decisions.

methodsHere, we assessed whether the commonly used methods for inferring interactions between moving individuals could discern the effects of environment and other moving individuals on the movement of the focal individual. We used three statistical methods: dynamic interaction index, and two methods based on step selection functions. We created five scenarios in which the animals' movements were influenced either by their physical environment alone or by inter-individual interactions. The physical environment is constructed such that it leads to a correlation between the movement trajectories of two individuals.

resultsWe found that neglecting the effects of physical environmental features when analysing interactions between moving animals leads to biased inference, i.e. inter-individual interactions spuriously inferred as affecting the movement of the focal individual. We suggest that landscape data should always be included when analysing animal interactions from movement data. In the absence of landscape data, the inference of inter-individual interactions is improved by applying 'Spatial+', a recently introduced method that reduces the bias of unmeasured spatial factors.

conclusionsThis study contributes to improved inference of biotic and abiotic effects on individual movement obtained by telemetry data. Step selection functions are flexible tools that offer the possibility to include multiple factors of interest as well as combine it with Spatial+.

Indexed as

CollinearityConfoundingHabitat heterogeneityInter-individual interactionsMovement dataPhysical environmentalStatistical methods

Identifiers

PMID40506736
PMCPMC12160437

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.