Accounting for possible detectable distances in a comparison of dispersal: Apollo dispersal in different habitats

Jon E. Brommer and Marianne S. Fred

Ecological Modelling, 2007, vol. 209, issue 2, 407-411

Abstract: Estimates of dispersal distances, when studied using mark-release-recapture techniques, are affected by many extrinsic factors such as study area size, local population density, and landscape configuration. We show that a comparison of observed dispersal distances between groups (e.g. sexes, populations, study periods) may lead to erroneous conclusions when groups differ in their distribution of possible detectable distances (the distribution of all distances in the system weighted by the number of marked individuals that have the possibility to move those distances). We show how this distribution can be used to: (1) test whether the scale of the study area is adequate for a description of mean dispersal; (2) express dispersal as a fraction of the number observed over the number of possible detectable movements for each distance. Dispersal scaled in this fashion can be compared between groups using standard statistical techniques. For illustration, we analyse five mark-release-recapture studies on the Apollo butterfly Parnassius apollo from two populations. Correcting for possible detectable distances shows that dispersal in an archipelago population is lower than in a coastal population, possibly due to harsher habitat between the patches in the former population.

Keywords: Parnassius apollo; Mark-release-recapture; Bootstrap; Study design; Fragmentation; Population comparison; Conservation; Low-density species (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2007
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380007003651
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:209:y:2007:i:2:p:407-411

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.07.008

Access Statistics for this article

Ecological Modelling is currently edited by Brian D. Fath

More articles in Ecological Modelling from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().