↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Comparing Habitat Suitability and Connectivity Modeling Methods for Conserving Pronghorn Migrations

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
340 Mendeley
Title
Comparing Habitat Suitability and Connectivity Modeling Methods for Conserving Pronghorn Migrations
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0049390
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erin E. Poor, Colby Loucks, Andrew Jakes, Dean L. Urban

Abstract

Terrestrial long-distance migrations are declining globally: in North America, nearly 75% have been lost. Yet there has been limited research comparing habitat suitability and connectivity models to identify migration corridors across increasingly fragmented landscapes. Here we use pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) migrations in prairie habitat to compare two types of models that identify habitat suitability: maximum entropy (Maxent) and expert-based (Analytic Hierarchy Process). We used distance to wells, distance to water, NDVI, land cover, distance to roads, terrain shape and fence presence to parameterize the models. We then used the output of these models as cost surfaces to compare two common connectivity models, least-cost modeling (LCM) and circuit theory. Using pronghorn movement data from spring and fall migrations, we identified potential migration corridors by combining each habitat suitability model with each connectivity model. The best performing model combination was Maxent with LCM corridors across both seasons. Maxent out-performed expert-based habitat suitability models for both spring and fall migrations. However, expert-based corridors can perform relatively well and are a cost-effective alternative if species location data are unavailable. Corridors created using LCM out-performed circuit theory, as measured by the number of pronghorn GPS locations present within the corridors. We suggest the use of a tiered approach using different corridor widths for prioritizing conservation and mitigation actions, such as fence removal or conservation easements.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 340 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
China 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
India 1 <1%
Other 4 1%
Unknown 316 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 70 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 19%
Researcher 63 19%
Student > Bachelor 34 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 5%
Other 42 12%
Unknown 51 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 142 42%
Environmental Science 100 29%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 2%
Engineering 6 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 1%
Other 14 4%
Unknown 67 20%