Cross-scale Correlations and the Design and Analysis of Avian Habitat Selection Studies

Abstract It has long been suggested that birds select habitat hierarchically, progressing from coarser to finer spatial scales. This hypothesis, in conjunction with the realization that many organisms likely respond to environmental patterns at multiple spatial scales, has led to a large number of avian habitat studies that have attempted to quantify habitat associations at multiple scales. Typically, multiscale habitat selection studies involve the assessment of habitat selection separately at two or more scales. Until recently, these studies have ignored the potential for cross-scale correlations: correlations among habitat variables across scales. If environmental patterns are correlated across the scales being analyzed, researchers using traditional analytical methods may reach erroneous conclusions about the presence or strength of habitat associations at a given scale. We discuss the ways in which cross-scale correlations manifest themselves in two types of habitat selection studies: (1) “constrained” designs that assume a hierarchical ordering of habitat selection decisions, and (2) “unconstrained” designs, which do not assume such a selection process. We demonstrate approaches for quantifying and modeling cross-scale correlations, including a simulation model, a variance decomposition technique, and a hierarchical modeling approach based on classification tree analysis. We conclude that cross-scale correlations have the potential to affect data interpretation in all types of habitat selection studies and that, even with careful attention to experimental design and the application of newly developed statistical techniques, it is likely their effects cannot be eliminated.

[1]  P. Klopfer BEHAVIORAL ASPECTS OF HABITAT SELECTION: THE ROLE OF EARLY EXPERIENCE , 2002 .

[2]  L. Partridge Habitat selection in titmice , 1974, Nature.

[3]  M. Garvin,et al.  HABITAT AND NESTING SUCCESS OF BLUE JAYS (CYANOCITTA CRISTATA): IMPORTANCE OF SCALE , 2002 .

[4]  Stan Openshaw,et al.  Modifiable Areal Unit Problem , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[5]  Theodore R. Simons,et al.  LANDSCAPE EFFECTS ON BREEDING SONGBIRD ABUNDANCE IN MANAGED FORESTS , 2002 .

[6]  James F. Wittenberger,et al.  Spatial and Temporal Scales in Habitat Selection , 1991, The American Naturalist.

[7]  G. De’ath,et al.  CLASSIFICATION AND REGRESSION TREES: A POWERFUL YET SIMPLE TECHNIQUE FOR ECOLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS , 2000 .

[8]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Classification and Regression Trees , 1984 .

[9]  Kevin McGarigal,et al.  Hierarchical, Multi-scale decomposition of species-environment relationships , 2002, Landscape Ecology.

[10]  G. Luck The habitat requirements of the rufous treecreeper (Climacteris rufa). 1. Preferential habitat use demonstrated at multiple spatial scales , 2002 .

[11]  M. Graham CONFRONTING MULTICOLLINEARITY IN ECOLOGICAL MULTIPLE REGRESSION , 2003 .

[12]  Pingjun Li,et al.  Nest-Site Selection and Nesting Success of Cavity-Nesting Birds in High Elevation Forest Drainages , 1991 .

[13]  T. Lauber,et al.  LINKING CONTINENTAL CLIMATE, LAND USE, AND LAND PATTERNS WITH GRASSLAND BIRD DISTRIBUTION ACROSS THE CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES , 1999 .

[14]  Jessica Gurevitch,et al.  EFFECTS OF SPATIAL STRUCTURES ON THE RESULTS OF FIELD EXPERIMENTS , 2004 .

[15]  Thomas C. Edwards,et al.  Landscape patterns as habitat predictors: building and testing models for cavity-nesting birds in the Uinta Mountains of Utah, USA , 2002, Landscape Ecology.

[16]  E. Bollinger,et al.  Nest-site Selection and Renesting in the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea) , 2001 .

[17]  M. Graham Factors determining the upper limit of giant kelp, Macrocystis pyrifera Agardh, along the Monterey Peninsula, central California, USA , 1997 .

[18]  E. Huhta,et al.  Distribution and reproductive success of the Pied Flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca in relation to forest patch size and vegetation characteristics; the effect of scale , 2008 .

[19]  G. Daily Heartwood Decay and Vertical Distribution of Red-Naped Sapsucker Nest Cavities , 1993 .

[20]  Jianguo Wu,et al.  The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology , 1996, Landscape Ecology.

[21]  L. Brennan,et al.  THE HABITAT CONCEPT IN ORNITHOLOGY Theory and Applications , 1993 .

[22]  J. Wiens Spatial Scaling in Ecology , 1989 .

[23]  B. Manly,et al.  Resource selection by animals: statistical design and analysis for field studies. , 1994 .

[24]  E. Bollinger,et al.  HABITAT SELECTION AND REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS OF LOGGERHEAD SHRIKES IN NORTHWEST MISSOURI: A HIERARCHICAL APPROACH , 2001 .

[25]  Douglas H. Johnson THE COMPARISON OF USAGE AND AVAILABILITY MEASUREMENTS FOR EVALUATING RESOURCE PREFERENCE , 1980 .

[26]  J. Whittaker Model Interpretation from the Additive Elements of the Likelihood Function , 1984 .

[27]  T. Edwards,et al.  A Variance-decomposition Approach to Investigating Multiscale Habitat Associations , 2006 .

[28]  Describing willow flycatcher habitats : scale perspectives and gender differences , 1992 .

[29]  W. Pyle,et al.  Nest site relationships among cavity-nesting birds of riparian and snowpocket aspen woodlands in the northwestern Great Basin , 1995 .

[30]  Jason Jones,et al.  Habitat Selection Studies in Avian Ecology: A Critical Review , 2001 .

[31]  K. J. Gutzwiller,et al.  Multiscale Associations between Cavity-Nesting Birds and Features of Wyoming Streamside Woodlands , 1987 .

[32]  M. Cody Habitat selection in birds , 1987 .

[33]  W. Kristan Sources and Expectations for Hierarchical Structure in Bird-habitat Associations , 2006 .