Kernel density estimators of home range: smoothing and the autocorrelation red herring.

Two oft-cited drawbacks of kernel density estimators (KDEs) of home range are their sensitivity to the choice of smoothing parameter(s) and their need for independent data. Several simulation studies have been conducted to compare the performance of objective, data-based methods of choosing optimal smoothing parameters in the context of home range and utilization distribution (UD) estimation. Lost in this discussion of choice of smoothing parameters is the general role of smoothing in data analysis, namely, that smoothing serves to increase precision at the cost of increased bias. A primary goal of this paper is to illustrate this bias-variance trade-off by applying KDEs to sampled locations from simulated movement paths. These simulations will also be used to explore the role of autocorrelation in estimating UDs. Autocorrelation can be reduced (1) by increasing study duration (for a fixed sample size) or (2) by decreasing the sampling rate. While the first option will often be reasonable, for a fixed study duration higher sampling rates should always result in improved estimates of space use. Further, KDEs with typical data-based methods of choosing smoothing parameters should provide competitive estimates of space use for fixed study periods unless autocorrelation substantially alters the optimal level of smoothing.

[1]  Helene Lair,et al.  Estimating the Location of the Focal Center in Red Squirrel Home Ranges , 1987 .

[2]  R. Powell,et al.  An Evaluation of the Accuracy of Kernel Density Estimators for Home Range Analysis , 1996 .

[3]  Beat Naef-Daenzer,et al.  A new transmitter for small animals and enhanced methods of home-range analysis , 1993 .

[4]  B. Worton Modelling radio-tracking data , 1995, Environmental and Ecological Statistics.

[5]  J. Simonoff Smoothing Methods in Statistics , 1998 .

[6]  R. Jennrich,et al.  Measurement of non-circular home range. , 1969, Journal of theoretical biology.

[7]  Young K. Truong,et al.  On bandwidth choice for density estimation with dependent data , 1995 .

[8]  Jason Jones,et al.  Describing breeding territories of migratory passerines: suggestions for sampling, choice of estimator, and delineation of core areas , 2005 .

[9]  S. Wood,et al.  GAMs with integrated model selection using penalized regression splines and applications to environmental modelling , 2002 .

[10]  R. Bonduriansky,et al.  Eliminating autocorrelation reduces biological relevance of home range estimates , 1999 .

[11]  Joshua J. Millspaugh,et al.  Comparison of least-squares cross-validation bandwidth options for kernel home-range estimation , 2003 .

[12]  David W. Macdonald,et al.  Are kernels the mustard? Data from global positioning system (GPS) collars suggests problems for kernel home- range analyses with least-squares cross-validation , 2005 .

[13]  David R. Brillinger,et al.  Employing stochastic differential equations to model wildlife motion , 2002 .

[14]  David R. Brillinger,et al.  Simulating constrained animal motion using stochastic differential equations , 2003 .

[15]  Thomas W. Schoener,et al.  An empirically based estimate of home range , 1981 .

[16]  B. Worton Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home-range studies , 1989 .

[17]  JOHN FIEBERG,et al.  Utilization Distribution Estimation Using Weighted Kernel Density Estimators , 2007 .

[18]  M. C. Jones,et al.  A Brief Survey of Bandwidth Selection for Density Estimation , 1996 .

[19]  Desmond J. Higham,et al.  An Algorithmic Introduction to Numerical Simulation of Stochastic Differential Equations , 2001, SIAM Rev..

[20]  J. A. Vilar,et al.  Finite sample performance of density estimators from unequally spaced data , 2000 .

[21]  R. Swihart On testing for independence of animal movements , 1997 .

[22]  James E. Dunn,et al.  Analysis of Radio Telemetry Data in Studies of Home Range , 1977 .

[23]  S. T. Buckland,et al.  ANALYSIS OF POPULATION TRENDS FOR FARMLAND BIRDS USING GENERALIZED ADDITIVE MODELS , 2000 .

[24]  Robert A. Gitzen,et al.  Analysis of Animal Space Use and Movements , 2001 .

[25]  Norman A. Slade,et al.  Testing For Independence of Observations in Animal Movements , 1985 .

[26]  M. Hazelton,et al.  Plug-in bandwidth matrices for bivariate kernel density estimation , 2003 .

[27]  JOHN FIEBERG,et al.  A Long-Term Age-Specific Survival Analysis of Female White-Tailed Deer , 2006 .

[28]  B. Worton Using Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate kernel-based home range estimators , 1995 .

[29]  Timothy D. Reynolds,et al.  Time intervals for estimating pronghorn and coyote home ranges and daily movements , 1990 .

[30]  R. Little To Model or Not To Model? Competing Modes of Inference for Finite Population Sampling , 2004 .

[31]  Joshua J. Millspaugh,et al.  Effects of sample size on kernel home range estimates , 1999 .

[32]  Gary C. White,et al.  Autocorrelation of location estimates and the analysis of radiotracking data , 1999 .

[33]  F. Bunnell,et al.  Characterizing independence of observations in movements of columbian black-tailed deer , 1994 .

[34]  Rolf A. Ims,et al.  Effects of spatiotemporal scale on autocorrelation and home range estimators , 1997 .

[35]  H. Preisler,et al.  Modeling animal movements using stochastic differential equations , 2004 .

[36]  P. Vieu,et al.  Data-Driven Bandwidth Choice for Density Estimation Based on Dependent Data , 1990 .

[37]  M. C. Jones,et al.  A reliable data-based bandwidth selection method for kernel density estimation , 1991 .