背景:空间行为,包括家庭行为,栖息地选择,和运动,在估计动物对景观异质性的反应方面可以提供非常丰富的信息。这些空间行为对人类土地改造和资源等特征的反应可以突出物种的空间策略,以最大限度地提高适应性和降低死亡率。这些策略在空间上可能有所不同,temporal,和单独的尺度,这些尺度上的行为组合会导致物种之间非常不同的策略。
方法:利用这些尺度上存在的变化,我们描述了物种如何对其环境中的刺激做出反应,从宽尺度到精细尺度的空间反应到人类对其环境的改变。使用15山猫年和31土狼年的GPS数据,这些数据来自居住在包括一系列人类土地改造的景观中的个人,我们评估了这两个物种对人类改变景观的反应的复杂性,通过它们的家园范围大小,栖息地选择,和功能反应行为,年度会计,季节性,和diel变异。
结果:山猫和土狼使用不同的策略来应对人类在其家园范围内的修饰,山猫随着人类修饰的增加而广泛地扩大了它们的家庭范围,并且在整个季节和一天中的时间在栖息地选择中显示出功能响应的时间一致性。同时,土狼并没有通过增加人类修饰来扩大他们的家园范围,而是通过栖息地选择策略证明了对人类改变的精细反应,这些策略有时会随着时间和季节的变化而变化,与选择行为中的功能反应配对。
结论:这些对栖息地的反应差异,资源,两个物种之间的人类修饰强调了动物可以在人为环境中存在的空间行为的变化。根据这些时空响应和个体差异对动物的空间行为进行分类可以帮助预测物种将如何根据其当前的空间行为对未来的变化做出反应。
BACKGROUND: Spatial behavior, including home-ranging behaviors, habitat selection, and movement, can be extremely informative in estimating how animals respond to landscape heterogeneity. Responses in these spatial behaviors to features such as human land modification and resources can highlight a species\' spatial strategy to maximize fitness and minimize mortality. These strategies can vary on spatial, temporal, and individual scales, and the combination of behaviors on these scales can lead to very different strategies among species.
METHODS: Harnessing the variation present at these scales, we characterized how species may respond to stimuli in their environments ranging from broad- to fine-scale spatial responses to human modification in their environment. Using 15 bobcat-years and 31 coyote-years of GPS data from individuals inhabiting a landscape encompassing a range of human land modification, we evaluated the complexity of both species\' responses to human modification on the landscape through their home range size, habitat selection, and functional response behaviors, accounting for annual, seasonal, and diel variation.
RESULTS: Bobcats and coyotes used different strategies in response to human modification in their home ranges, with bobcats broadly expanding their home range with increases in human modification and displaying temporal consistency in functional response in habitat selection across both season and time of day. Meanwhile, coyotes did not expand their home ranges with increased human modification, but instead demonstrated fine-scale responses to human modification with habitat selection strategies that sometimes varied by time of day and season, paired with functional responses in selection behaviors.
CONCLUSIONS: These differences in response to habitat, resources, and human modification between the two species highlighted the variation in spatial behaviors animals can use to exist in anthropogenic environments. Categorizing animal spatial behavior based on these spatiotemporal responses and individual variation can help in predicting how a species will respond to future change based on their current spatial behavior.