The Infona portal uses cookies, i.e. strings of text saved by a browser on the user's device. The portal can access those files and use them to remember the user's data, such as their chosen settings (screen view, interface language, etc.), or their login data. By using the Infona portal the user accepts automatic saving and using this information for portal operation purposes. More information on the subject can be found in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. By closing this window the user confirms that they have read the information on cookie usage, and they accept the privacy policy and the way cookies are used by the portal. You can change the cookie settings in your browser.
Dispersal can augment viability of small populations, but this effect is contingent on successful post-dispersal reproduction of individuals. Nonetheless, variation in post-dispersal reproductive success is frequently ignored, such that dispersal (movement between fragments) and effective dispersal (movement followed by reproduction) are often viewed interchangeably. Mate choice by females can potentially...
Abstract: Predictive models of species distributions are typically developed with data collected along roads. Roadside sampling may provide a biased (nonrandom) sample; however, it is currently unknown whether roadside sampling limits the accuracy of predictions generated by species distribution models. We tested whether roadside sampling affects the accuracy of predictions generated by species distribution models by using a prospective sampling strategy designed specifically to address this issue. We built models from roadside data and validated model predictions at paired locations on unpaved roads and 200 m away from roads (off road), spatially and temporally independent from the data used for model building. We predicted species distributions of 15 bird species on the basis of point‐count data from a landbird monitoring program in Montana and Idaho (U.S.A.). We used hierarchical occupancy models to account for imperfect detection. We expected predictions of species distributions derived from roadside‐sampling data would be less accurate when validated with data from off‐road sampling than when it was validated with data from roadside sampling and that model accuracy would be differentially affected by whether species were generalists, associated with edges, or associated with interior forest. Model performance measures (kappa, area under the curve of a receiver operating characteristic plot, and true skill statistic) did not differ between model predictions of roadside and off‐road distributions of species. Furthermore, performance measures did not differ among edge, generalist, and interior species, despite a difference in vegetation structure along roadsides and off road and that 2 of the 15 species were more likely to occur along roadsides. If the range of environmental gradients is surveyed in roadside‐sampling efforts, our results suggest that surveys along unpaved roads can be a valuable, unbiased source of information for species distribution models.
Set the date range to filter the displayed results. You can set a starting date, ending date or both. You can enter the dates manually or choose them from the calendar.