ライフサイエンスコーパス: home range

1 e probability of migrating and the size of a home range.

2 l gangs of the same "community" use the same home range.

3 much larger groups near the center of their home range.

4 es at home compared with outside Centaurea's home range.

5 gh variation in both RT and TtoR occurred in home ranges.

6 g than in non-overlapping portions of cougar home ranges.

7 ng portions of female-female and male-female home ranges.

8 pecies are sedentary as adults, with limited home ranges.

9 significantly more in same- and opposite-sex home ranges.

10 Within home ranges, a higher variation in both RT and TtoR was

11 Reduced size of home range and core area (i.e., areas of concentrated us

12 the ratio of distances characteristic of the home range and the measurement window, along with an exp

13 are known to increase the size of mammalian home ranges and territories.

14 e traveled, evenness of space use within the home range, and glucocorticoid concentrations.

15 objective was to use movements, estimates of home range, and resource selection analysis to identify

16 clusive areas and that these colony-specific home ranges are determined by density-dependent competit

17 e linear relationship between group size and home range area and daily travel distance, which depict

18 y decreases, but not the steep rate at which home range area increases.

19 U-shaped relationship between group size and home range area, average daily distance traveled, evenne

20 Home range area, geographic range size and body mass are

21 o that of the relation between body mass and home range area, suggesting that maximum body size is de

22 he identification of biologically meaningful home range areas will help advance the field.

23 The present work shows that stable home ranges arise when, in addition to scent-mediated co

24 uch an animal results in a slowly increasing home range, as shown for urban foxes (Vulpes vulpes).

25 harithonia, a butterfly with well-documented home range behaviour, in Miami-Dade County, Florida, for

26 is directly linked to animals' space use and home range behaviour; however, because memory cannot be

27 scaled and more directed than their typical home ranging behaviour.

28 ntial daily integrated PN exposure in the 56 homes ranged between 37 x 10(3) and 6.0 x 10(6) particle

29 Here we present a new model of home range-body size scaling based on fractal resource d

30 ere also highest for host species with large home ranges but were instead lowest for dietary generali

31 no universally constant scaling exponent for home range, but defines a possible range of values set b

32 roductive success) and the proportion of the home range covered by a key grass species, H. lanatus, f

33 We employed 27 annual home ranges for 13 cougars to test whether home range ov

34 We estimated home ranges for two winter seasons that ranged between 7

35 with an explicit prescription to extract the home range from observations.

36 Animals living in stable home ranges have many potential cues to locate food.

37 ee distinct strategies: (i) Stay in breeding home range; (ii) make return migrations to a specific ar

38 ster of S. neurona infections in otters with home ranges in southern Monterey Bay and a coastal segme

39 We apply the model to predict that home range increases with habitat fragmentation, and tha

40 at a group moves away from the center of its home range, its odds of winning an interaction decrease

41 As expected, home range location was highly selective in such landsca

42 ory are used to analyse a spatially explicit home range model for interacting wolf packs.

43 hem resource selection analysis, statistical home-range modelling and mechanistic movement modelling.

44 Mechanistic home-range models combine the benefits of these approach

45 Using mechanistic home-range models, we explore meerkat (Suricata suricatt

46 that smaller-bodied mammal species utilizing home ranges more intensively experience greater risk for

47 s an allometric scaling relation between the home range of an individual and its body size: Larger ma

48 icle content in soils within the approximate home range of an individual deer increased its odds of i

49 Here we report that soil microbes from the home range of the invasive exotic plant Centaurea maculo

50 ose dispersal distances as larvae exceed the home ranges of adults, decisions on the size of reserves

51 A theory is provided for the estimation of home ranges of animals from displacement measurement pro

52 lared cattle spent 2914 collar-nights in the home ranges of contact-collared badgers, and 5380 collar

53 lared badgers, and 5380 collar-nights in the home ranges of GPS-collared badgers, we detected no dire

54 ses with habitat fragmentation, and that the home ranges of larger species should be much more sensit

55 gnature of local micro-mammals, the broadest home-range of the macro-mammals and with modern plant sa

56 Consequences of home range overlap are also discussed.

57 in the wet season, driven by an increase in home range overlap towards the end of the dry season.

58 l home ranges for 13 cougars to test whether home range overlap was better explained by land tenure,

59 gratory, by means of three methods: seasonal home range overlap, spatio-temporal separation of season

60 s the primary driver explaining variation in home range overlap.

61 often than were expected based on degrees of home range overlap.

62 , and a spatial network based on patterns of home-range overlap among individuals.

63 To remain within their home ranges, polar bears responded to the higher westwar

64 For certain other species, however, home ranges reach a stable state.

65 d predation-risk factors and the size of two home-range regions (HRR), defined as areas of different

66 gh human disturbance or climatic changes) on home range size and habitat selection, our work sets the

67 ean, and variance of RT and TtoR) influences home range size and hierarchical habitat selection.

68 Androgenization has a strong effect on home range size in both sexes: AGD had a positive relati

69 of species used for roosting increased, that home range size increased (before: mean 0.14+/-SD 0.08 h

70 A comparison is provided between home range size inferred from our method and from other

71 Home range size, or the area used by individual organism

72 hat long RT and short TtoR result in a small home range size.

73 aviour such as migration, predator escape or home range size.

74 centrations in eggs collected at the smaller home range spatial scale of analysis.

75 udied by focusing either on geographic (e.g. home ranges, species' distribution) or on environmental

76 We have expanded on previous home-range studies by testing the effects of two previou

77 as higher and TtoR lower within the selected home range than outside, and moose home ranges were smal

78 mum body size is determined by the number of home ranges that can fit into a given land area.

79 Wandering males, in contrast, have expansive home ranges that overlap many males and females.

80 tions reaches a steady state, causing stable home ranges to emerge from the territorial dynamics.

81 of these early humans as they expanded their home ranges to include coastlines and followed the shift

82 constraints on defense cause exclusivity of home range use to decrease with increasing body size.

83 rch performance; (2) habitat preference; (3) home range utilization patterns; (4) social network stru

84 A total of 68 home ranges were estimated using kernel density estimati

85 selected home range than outside, and moose home ranges were small.

86 Home ranges were split into two regions (HRR): the 'core

87 ls, where each animal or animal group has a "home range" which overlaps with a number of others, and

88 ts suggest that simple bad luck-inhabiting a home range with high vector density-may play a much larg