Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Incorporating local habitat heterogeneity and productivity measures when modelling vertebrate richness

  • W Justin Cooper (a1) (a2), William J McShea (a1), David A Luther (a2) (a3) and Tavis Forrester (a1) (a4)

Summary

Declining species richness is a global concern; however, the coarse-scale metrics used at regional or landscape levels might not accurately represent the important habitat characteristics needed to estimate species richness. Currently, there exists a lack of knowledge with regard to the spatial extent necessary to correlate remotely sensed habitat metrics to species richness and animal surveys. We provide a protocol for determining the best scale to use when merging remotely sensed habitat and animal survey data as a step towards improving estimates of vertebrate species richness on broad scales. We test the relative importance of fine-resolution habitat heterogeneity and productivity metrics at multiple spatial scales as predictors of species richness for birds, frogs and mammals using a Bayesian approach and a combination of passive monitoring technologies. Model performance was different for each taxonomic group and dependent on the scale at which habitat heterogeneity and productivity were measured. Optimal scales included a 20-m radius for bats and frogs, an 80-m radius for birds and a 180-m radius for terrestrial mammals. Our results indicate that optimal scales do exist when merging remotely sensed habitat measures with ground-based surveys, but they differ between vertebrate groups. Additionally, the selection of a measurement scale is highly influential to our understanding of the relationships between species richness and habitat characteristics.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Author for correspondence: W Justin Cooper, Email: wcooper2@gmu.edu

References

Hide All
Bae, S, Müller, J, Lee, D, Vierling, KT, Vogeler, JC, Vierling, LA, Hudak, AT et al. (2018) Taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity of bird assemblages are oppositely associated to productivity and heterogeneity in temperate forests. Remote Sensing of Environment 215: 145156.
Barg, JJ, Aiama, DM, Jones, J, Robertson, RJ (2006) Within-territory habitat use and microhabitat selection by male cerulean warblers (Dendroica cerulea). The Auk 123: 795806.
Blomquist, SM, Hunter, ML (2010) A multi-scale assessment of amphibian habitat selection: Wood frog response to timber harvesting. Ecoscience 17: 251264.
Bouvier, M, Durrieu, S, Fournier, RA, Renaud, JP (2015) Generalizing predictive models of forest inventory attributes using an area-based approach with airborne LiDAR data. Remote Sensing of Environment 156: 322334.
Boyce, MS (2006) Scale for resource selection functions. Diversity and Distributions 12: 269276.
Boyce, MS, Mao, JS, Merrill, EH, Fortin, D, Monica, G, Fryxell, J, Turchin, P (2003) Scale and heterogeneity in habitat selection by elk in Yellowstone National Park. Ecoscience 10: 421431.
Britzke, ER, Murray, KL, Heywood, JS, Robbins, LW (2002) Acoustic identification. In: The Indiana Bat: Biology and Management of an Endangered Species, eds Kurta, A, Kennedy, J, pp. 221225. Austin, TX, USA: Bat Conservation International.
Davies, AB, Asner, GP (2014) Advances in animal ecology from 3D-LiDAR ecosystem mapping. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 29: 681691.
De Solla, SR, Shirose, LJ, Fernie, KJ, Barrett, GC, Brousseau, CS, Bishop, CA (2005) Effect of sampling effort and species detectability on volunteer based anuran monitoring programs. Biological Conservation 121: 585594.
Depraetere, M, Pavoine, S, Jiguet, F, Gasc, A, Duvail, S, Sueur, J (2012) Monitoring animal diversity using acoustic indices: implementation in a temperate woodland. Ecological Indicators 13: 4654.
Dorazio, RM, Royle, JA, Söderström, B, Glimskär, A (2006) Estimating species richness and accumulation by modeling species occurrence and detectability. Ecology 87: 842854.
Flyger, VF (1960) Movements and home range of the gray squirrel, Sciurus carolinensis, in two Maryland woodlots. Ecology 41: 365369.
Forrester, T, O’Brien, T, Fegraus, E, Jansen, PA, Palmer, J, Kays, R, Ahumada, J et al. (2016) An open standard for camera trap data. Biodiversity Data Journal 4: e10197.
Gao, B (1996) NDWI – a normalized difference water index for remote sensing of vegetation liquid water from space. Remote Sensing of Environment 58: 257266.
Gelman, A, Hill, J (2006) Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
He, KS, Bradley, BA, Cord, AF, Rocchini, D, Tuanmu, M-N, Schmidtlein, S et al. (2015) Will remote sensing shape the next generation of species distribution models? Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation 1: 418.
Hijmans, RJ (2017) raster: geographic data analysis and modeling. R package version 2.6–7.0.
Homer, C, Dewitz, J, Yang, L, Jin, S, Danielson, P, Xian, G et al. (2015) Completion of the 2011 national land cover database for the conterminous United States – representing a decade of land cover change information. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 81: 345354.
Huete, A, Didan, K, Miura, T, Rodriguez, E, Gao, X, Ferreira, L (2002) Overview of the radiometric and biophysical performance of the MODIS vegetation indices. Remote Sensing of Environment 83: 195213.
Jackson, HB, Fahrig, L (2012) What size is a biologically relevant landscape? Landscape Ecology 27: 929941.
Jenkins, CN, Pimm, SL, Joppa, LN (2013) Global patterns of terrestrial vertebrate diversity and conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 110: E2602E2610.
Johnson, DH (1980) The comparison of usage and availability measurements for evaluating resource preference. Ecology 61: 6571.
Kalogirou, S (2017) lctools: local correlation, spatial inequalities, geographically weighted regression and other tools. R package version 0.2–6.0.
Kamoske, AG, Dahlin, KM, Stark, SC, Serbin, SP (2019) Leaf area density from airborne LiDAR: comparing sensors and resolutions in a temperate broadleaf forest ecosystem. Forest Ecology and Management 433: 364375.
Kruschke, JK, Meredith, M (2018) BEST: Bayesian estimation supersedes the t-Test. R package version 0.5.1.
Marshall, MR, Cooper, RJ (2004) Territory size of a migratory songbird in response to caterpillar density and foliage structure. Ecology 85: 432445.
McGarigal, K, Wan, HY, Zeller, KA, Timm, BC, Cushman, SA (2016) Multi-scale habitat selection modeling: a review and outlook. Landscape Ecology 31: 11611175.
McShea, WJ, Forrester, T, Costello, R, He, Z, Kays, R (2016) Volunteer-run cameras as distributed sensors for macrosystem mammal research. Landscape Ecology 31: 5566.
Menzel, MA, Carter, TC, Jablonowski, LR, Mitchell, BL, Menzel, JM, Chapman, BR (2001) Home range size and habitat use of big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus) in a maternity colony located on a rural-urban interface in the southeast. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 117: 3645.
Mittelbach, GG, Steiner, CF, Scheiner, SM, Gross, KL, Reynolds, HL, Waide, RB et al. (2001) What is the observed relationship between species richness and productivity? Ecology 82: 23812396.
National Ecological Observatory Network (2017a) Data Products: DP1.10003.001. Provisional data downloaded from http://data.neonscience.org on 25 January 2017. Battelle, Boulder, CO, USA.
National Ecological Observatory Network (2017b) Data Product IDs: DP1.30003.001, DP3.30026.001, DP3.30019.001. 2016. Provided by NEON on 5 February 2017. Battelle, Boulder, CO, USA.
Ozoga, JJ, Harger, EM (1966) Winter activities and feeding habits of northern Michigan coyotes. Journal of Wildlife Management 30: 809818.
Proença, V, Martin, LJ, Pereira, HM, Fernandez, M, McRae, L, Belnap, J et al. (2017) Global biodiversity monitoring: from data sources to Essential Biodiversity Variables. Biological Conservation 213: 256263.
R Development Core Team (2010) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Rodewald, P (2015) The birds of North America. URL https://birdsna.org.
Roussel, J, Auty, D (2018) lidR: airborne LiDAR data manipulation and visualization for forestry applications. R package version 1.5.1.
Secades, C, O’Connor, B, Brown, C, Walpole, M (2014) Earth Observation for Biodiversity Monitoring: A Review of Current Approaches and Future Opportunities for Tracking Progress towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Technical Series No. 72. Montreal, Canada: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Senior, P, Butlin, RK, Altringham, JD (2005) Sex and segregation in temperate bats. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Biological Sciences 272: 24672473.
Sing, T, Sander, O, Beerenwinkel, N, Lengauer, T (2005) ROCR: visualizing classifier performance in R. Bioinformatics 21: 34903491.
Skalak, SL, Sherwin, RE, Brigham, RM (2012) Sampling period, size and duration influence measures of bat species richness from acoustic surveys. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 3: 490502.
Su, Y-S, Yajima, M (2015). R2jags: using R to run ‘JAGS’. R package version 0.5–7.0.
Sueur, J, Pavoine, S, Hamerlynck, O, Duvail, S (2008) Rapid acoustic survey for biodiversity appraisal. PLoS ONE 3: e4065.
Tews, J, Brose, U, Grimm, V, Tielbörger, K, Wichmann, MC, Schwager, M, Jeltsch, F (2004) Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity: the importance of keystone structures. Journal of Biogeography 31: 7992.
Theobald, DM, Stevens, DL, White, D, Urquhart, NS, Olsen, AR, Norman, JB (2007) Using GIS to generate spatially balanced random survey designs for natural resource applications. Environmental Management 40: 134146.
Villanueva-Rivera, LJ, Pijanowski, BC (2018) soundecology: soundscape ecology. R package version 1.3.3.
Wiens, JA (1989) Spatial scaling in ecology. Functional Ecology 3: 385397.
Wimmer, J, Towsey, M, Roe, P, Williamson, I (2013) Sampling environmental acoustic recordings to determine bird species richness. Ecological Applications 23: 14191428.
Zipkin, EF, Grant, EHC, Fagan, WF (2012) Evaluating the predictive abilities of community occupancy models using AUC while accounting for imperfect detection. Ecological Applications 22: 19621972.

Keywords

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Cooper et al. supplementary material
Cooper et al. supplementary material

 Unknown (57 KB)
57 KB

Incorporating local habitat heterogeneity and productivity measures when modelling vertebrate richness

  • W Justin Cooper (a1) (a2), William J McShea (a1), David A Luther (a2) (a3) and Tavis Forrester (a1) (a4)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed