Functional responses in animal movement explain spatial heterogeneity in animal–habitat relationships

Understanding why heterogeneity exists in animal-habitat spatial relationships is critical for identifying the drivers of animal distributions. Functional responses in habitat selection - whereby animals adjust their habitat selection depending on habitat availability - are useful for describing animal-habitat spatial heterogeneity. However, they could be yielded by different movement tactics, involving contrasting interspecific interactions. Identifying functional responses in animal movement, rather than in emergent spatial patterns like habitat selection, could disentangle the effects of different movement behaviours on spatial heterogeneity in animal-habitat relationships. This would clarify how functional responses in habitat selection emerge and provide a general tool for understanding the mechanistic drivers of animal distributions. We tested this approach using data from GPS-collared woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus), a prey species under top-down control. We tested how caribou selected and moved with respect to a key resource (lichen-conifer stands) as a function of the availability of surrounding refuge land-cover (closed-conifer stands), using step selection functions. Caribou selected resource patches more strongly in areas richer in refuge land-cover - a functional response in habitat selection. However, adjustments in multiple movement behaviours could have generated this pattern: stronger directed movement towards resource patches and/or longer residency within resource patches, in areas richer in refuges. Different contributions of these behaviours would produce contrasting forager spatial dynamics. We identified functional responses in both movement behaviours: caribou were more likely to move towards resource patches in areas richer in refuge land-cover, and to remain in these patches during movement steps. This tactic enables caribou to forage for longer in safer areas where they can rapidly seek refuge in dense cover when predators are detected. Our study shows that functional responses in movement can expose the context-dependent movement decisions that generate heterogeneity in animal-habitat spatial relationships. We used these functional responses to characterise anti-predator movement tactics employed by a large herbivore, but they could be applied in many different scenarios. The movement rules from functional responses in movement are well-suited to integration in spatial explicit individual-based models for forecasting animal distributions in landscapes undergoing environmental change.

[1]  C. Patrick Doncaster,et al.  Factors regulating local variations in abundance: field tests on hedgehogs, Erinaceus europaeus , 1994 .

[2]  Gordon B. Stenhouse,et al.  Removing GPS collar bias in habitat selection studies , 2004 .

[3]  A. Mysterud,et al.  Cover as a habitat element for temperate ungulates: effects on habitat selection and demography , 1999 .

[4]  Mark S Boyce,et al.  Applications of step-selection functions in ecology and conservation , 2014, Movement Ecology.

[5]  W. Pan Akaike's Information Criterion in Generalized Estimating Equations , 2001, Biometrics.

[6]  J. A. Baker,et al.  Factors influencing the seasonal diet selection by woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus tarandus) in boreal forests in Ontario , 2015 .

[7]  J. Laundré Behavioral response races, predator-prey shell games, ecology of fear, and patch use of pumas and their ungulate prey. , 2010, Ecology.

[8]  D. Fortin,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity in the Strength of Plant-Herbivore Interactions under Predation Risk: The Tale of Bison Foraging in Wolf Country , 2013, PloS one.

[9]  R. Courtois,et al.  Multi-trophic resource selection function enlightens the behavioural game between wolves and their prey. , 2013, The Journal of animal ecology.

[10]  T. Osko,et al.  MOOSE HABITAT PREFERENCES IN RESPONSE TO CHANGING AVAILABILITY , 2004 .

[11]  Thierry Duchesne,et al.  Equivalence between Step Selection Functions and Biased Correlated Random Walks for Statistical Inference on Animal Movement , 2015, PloS one.

[12]  P. Turchin Quantitative analysis of movement : measuring and modeling population redistribution in animals and plants , 1998 .

[13]  Uta Berger,et al.  Pattern-Oriented Modeling of Agent-Based Complex Systems: Lessons from Ecology , 2005, Science.

[14]  Chris J. Johnson,et al.  Foraging across a variable landscape: behavioral decisions made by woodland caribou at multiple spatial scales , 2001, Oecologia.

[15]  Daniel Fortin,et al.  Moving to stay in place: behavioral mechanisms for coexistence of African large carnivores. , 2013, Ecology.

[16]  E. Revilla,et al.  A movement ecology paradigm for unifying organismal movement research , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Irwin Nazareth,et al.  Development and Validation of a Risk Model for Prediction of Hazardous Alcohol Consumption in General Practice Attendees: The PredictAL Study , 2011, PloS one.

[18]  M. Boyce,et al.  WOLVES INFLUENCE ELK MOVEMENTS: BEHAVIOR SHAPES A TROPHIC CASCADE IN YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK , 2005 .

[19]  Lael Parrott,et al.  Spatio-temporal dynamics in the response of woodland caribou and moose to the passage of grey wolf. , 2014, The Journal of animal ecology.

[20]  D. Hebert,et al.  SPATIAL SEPARATION OF CARIBOU FROM MOOSE AND ITS RELATION TO PREDATION BY WOLVES , 2004 .

[21]  P. Grambsch,et al.  A Package for Survival Analysis in S , 1994 .

[22]  E. Charnov Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. , 1976, Theoretical population biology.

[23]  S. Creel,et al.  Elk alter habitat selection as an antipredator response to wolves , 2005 .

[24]  Danielle J. Marceau,et al.  The role of agent-based models in wildlife ecology and management , 2011 .

[25]  Lael Parrott,et al.  Levels of emergence in individual based models: Coping with scarcity of data and pattern redundancy , 2011 .

[26]  Mathieu Basille,et al.  Ecologically based definition of seasons clarifies predator–prey interactions , 2013 .

[27]  Daniel Fortin,et al.  Multi-level functional responses for wildlife conservation: the case of threatened caribou in managed boreal forests , 2012 .

[28]  R. Courtois,et al.  Winter selection of landscapes by woodland caribou: behavioural response to geographical gradients in habitat attributes , 2008 .

[29]  Andrew E. Derocher,et al.  Functional responses in polar bear habitat selection , 2003 .

[30]  Mark Hebblewhite,et al.  Caribou encounters with wolves increase near roads and trails: a time‐to‐event approach , 2011 .

[31]  D. Macdonald,et al.  Behavioral adjustments of African herbivores to predation risk by lions: spatiotemporal variations influence habitat use. , 2009, Ecology.

[32]  Mathieu Basille,et al.  Plastic response of fearful prey to the spatiotemporal dynamics of predator distribution. , 2015, Ecology.

[33]  O. J. Schmidt Behavior of predators and prey and links with population-level processes , 2005 .

[34]  D. Seip Factors limiting woodland caribou populations and their interrelationships with wolves and moose in southeastern British Columbia , 1992 .

[35]  S. L. Lima,et al.  Predator-prey shell games: large-scale movement and its implications for decision-making by prey , 2002 .

[36]  D. Macdonald,et al.  Reactive responses of zebras to lion encounters shape their predator–prey space game at large scale , 2016 .

[37]  F. Messier,et al.  Hierarchical habitat selection by woodland caribou: its relationship to limiting factors , 2000 .

[38]  Daniel Fortin,et al.  Logging‐induced changes in habitat network connectivity shape behavioral interactions in the wolf–caribou–moose system , 2014 .

[39]  Daniel Fortin,et al.  A spatial theory for characterizing predator–multiprey interactions in heterogeneous landscapes , 2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[40]  J. Gaillard,et al.  Temporal Variation in Fitness Components and Population Dynamics of Large Herbivores , 2000 .

[41]  Colleen Cassady St. Clair,et al.  Functional responses in habitat selection by tropical birds moving through fragmented forest. , 2010 .

[42]  Shannon E Albeke,et al.  Linking anti-predator behaviour to prey demography reveals limited risk effects of an actively hunting large carnivore. , 2013, Ecology letters.

[43]  Christina Freytag Spatial Data Analysis An Introduction For Gis Users , 2016 .

[44]  H. Beyer,et al.  Group-size-mediated habitat selection and group fusion-fission dynamics of bison under predation risk. , 2009, Ecology.

[45]  Kevin A. Wood,et al.  Co-creation of individual-based models by practitioners and modellers to inform environmental decision-making , 2015 .

[46]  J. F. Benson,et al.  Spatiotemporal variation in selection of roads influences mortality risk for canids in an unprotected landscape , 2015 .

[47]  Steven F. Railsback,et al.  Individual-based modeling and ecology , 2005 .

[48]  Bryan F. J. Manly,et al.  Assessing habitat selection when availability changes , 1996 .

[49]  Atle Mysterud,et al.  FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES IN HABITAT USE: AVAILABILITY INFLUENCES RELATIVE USE IN TRADE-OFF SITUATIONS , 1998 .

[50]  R. Courtois,et al.  Linking moose habitat selection to limiting factors , 2005 .

[51]  H. Pulliam,et al.  Ecological Processes That Affect Populations in Complex Landscapes , 1992 .

[52]  J. Gaillard,et al.  Movement is the glue connecting home ranges and habitat selection. , 2016, The Journal of animal ecology.

[53]  P. Nonacs State dependent behavior and the Marginal Value Theorem , 2001 .

[54]  Michael R. Heithaus,et al.  Spatial responses to predators vary with prey escape mode , 2010, Animal Behaviour.

[55]  P. Drapeau,et al.  Adjustments in habitat selection to changing availability induce fitness costs for a threatened ungulate , 2015 .

[56]  R. Courtois,et al.  Landscape management for woodland caribou: the protection of forest blocks influences wolf-caribou co-occurrence , 2009, Landscape Ecology.

[57]  Wendy C. H. Green Social influences on contact maintenance interactions of bison mothers and calves: group size and nearest-neighbour distance , 1992, Animal Behaviour.

[58]  Mark Hebblewhite,et al.  Modelling wildlife–human relationships for social species with mixed‐effects resource selection models , 2007 .

[59]  Simon Benhamou,et al.  Dynamic Approach to Space and Habitat Use Based on Biased Random Bridges , 2011, PloS one.

[60]  Andrew Sih,et al.  Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview. , 2004, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[61]  Alain F. Zuur,et al.  A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems , 2010 .