RETIC-BOX , Publisher
and Library-Part 2- , The 2nd part of the total 15 parts- Dimana dan Bagaimana sarana Jalanan
Membahayakan Mamalia di Hutan Asia
Tenggara ?
From : RETIC-BOX ,
Publisher and Library
Present
Part 2
The 2nd part of the total 15 parts
The Journal :
Dimana dan Bagaimana sarana Jalanan Membahayakan Mamalia di Hutan Asia Tenggara ?
..............................................................
biodiversity,habitat,lingkungan,komunitas,ekosistim,indonesia,vegetasi,hayati,satwa,
wildlife,hewan,binatang,keaneka
ragaman,konservasi,hutan,tropis,langka,in situ,ek situ,semarang, komunitas
reptil, komunitas satwa, hewan,tanaman,retic box, biodiversity,habitat,lingkungan,komunitas,ekosistim,indonesia,vegetasi,hayati,satwa,
wildlife,hewan,binatang,keaneka
ragaman,konservasi,hutan,tropis,langka,in situ,ek situ,semarang,komunitas
reptil,komunitas satwa,hewan,tanaman,retic box,t-rec,kse,komunitas satwa
eksotik,tugumuda reptiles community,komunitas tugumuda, komunitas reptil tugumuda,library,publisher,pustaka,perpustakaan,on
line,gratis,
........................................
Bahan dan metode
Ethics statement
Penelitian ini dilakukan sebagai bagian
dari tesis GRCs Ph.D. bahwa menerima
persetujuan etika penelitian manusia dari James Cook University Komite Etika
Penelitian Manusia (No. H3655 , Dampak jalan pada mamalia besar dan masyarakat
adat di Asia Tenggara 31 Maret 2010 - 21
Feb 2012 ; kategori 1 ) . Persetujuan ini
izinkan wawancara terdiri dari pertanyaan untuk memperoleh informasi
tentang persepsi jalan dan pola panen sumber daya sepanjang jalan . kuesioner
untuk ahli eksplisit dijamin anonimitas dan penyelesaian kuesioner online itu
sendiri tersirat persetujuan . Kuesioner berisi informasi yang bersifat
menghubungkan ke responden .
Dimana jalan mengancam habitat mamalia
yang terancam punah?
pekerja
lapangan dapat memberikan informasi terbaik yang tersedia tentang jalan
mengancam mamalia yang terancam punah di wilayah tersebut. Wawancara pakar
dapat digunakan untuk mendapatkan informasi tentang ancaman keanekaragaman
hayati kontemporer seperti jalan , kami email kuesioner singkat para ahli dalam
penelitian mamalia dan / atau konservasi dari lembaga yang relevan ilmiah dan
universitas, LSM lingkungan dan departemen satwa liar di negara-negara berikut
dan sub-wilayah: Kamboja, Laos, Indonesia (Irian Jaya, Jawa, Sulawesi,
Sumatera, Kalimantan), Malaysia (Semenanjung Malaysia, Malaysia Borneo),
Myanmar, Filipina, Thailand dan Vietnam.
Setidaknya satu ahli dari masing-masing
negara dan sub-region yang dihubungi. Untuk memaksimalkan tingkat respons,
setiap pendapat ahli terbatas untuk maksimal tiga jalan dipercaya untuk
berkontribusi pada konversi hutan dan
ilegal perburuan / perdagangan. Kami meminta nama jalan dan mengancam habitat
mamalia. Beberapa ahli yang tidak menanggapi secara tertulis kemudian diwawancarai melalui telepon.
Untuk meminimalkan pengamat dan bias
organisasi , hanya jalan yang dinamai oleh setidaknya dua responden dengan
afiliasi yang berbeda yang disorot . Namun kriteria tersebut longgar di Myanmar
di mana ada kekurangan ahli yang relevan bekerja di negara itu . Responden juga
mengidentifikasi jalan yang diusulkan di negara mereka . jalan yang diusulkan
dimasukkan tanpa bias pengurangan karena potensial jalan dapat kurang dipublikasikan untuk menguatkan
oleh para ahli yang berbeda . Informasi yang dihimpun dikembalikan ke ahli
negara untuk verifikasi akhir . Terakhir, kami menilai klaim ahli jalan
mempengaruhi mamalia yang terancam punah dengan informasi dari artikel
peer-review dan grey literature .
Kami mengakui dua peringatan di sini .
Pertama , daftar jalan diidentifikasi oleh para ahli tidak lengkap untuk Asia
Tenggara , terutama ketika responden yang terbatas jumlahnya - pasti bisa ada jalan lebih penting daripada yang ditangkap
oleh wawancara kami . Kedua, daftar jalan untuk setiap negara tidak selalu
mewakili jalan paling mengancam dalam hal dampak pada mamalia yang terancam
punah , tetapi hanyalah contoh menonjol berdasarkan pengalaman dari para ahli
yang bekerja di masing-masing negara .
Bagaimana jalan mengancam habitat
mamalia yang terancam punah?
Apakah jalan membagi dua habitat tempat
mamalia langka yang mungkin masih ada ?
klaim ahli dari jalan memotong habitat
tempat mamalia langka yang mungkin masihada idealnya harus didukung oleh bukti
empiris. Jika data kehadiran spesies di sekitar jalan yang tersedia, model distribusi-species
dapat dibangun untuk menggambarkan habitat
yang sangat cocok di sekitar jalan dan memutuskan apakah jalan yang
direncanakan akan memotong melalui habitat yang penting.
Menggunakan Entropi Maksimum (MAXENT) models , kita modelkan kehadiran-hanya data pada Tapir Asia yang terancam punah (Tapirus
indicus) di Semenanjung Malaysia selama tiga jalan diidentifikasi oleh para
ahli (S1 Tabel) untuk menilai apakah mereka melewati habitat penting untuk
spesies ini. model MAXENT memeriksa kemungkinan terjadinya kehadiran-hanya data sebagai fungsi dari variabel lingkungan
dengan secara acak memilih piksel latar belakang sebagai pseudo-ketidakhadiran .
Ketika tiga jalan yang diletakkan di atas MAXENT-diprediksi peta distribusi untuk
Tapir Asia (lihat untuk metode( Clements GR, Rayan DM, Aziz SA, Kawanishi K, Traeholt C, et al. (2012) Predicting the
distribution of the Asian tapir (Tapirus
indicus) in Peninsular Malaysia using maximum entropy modelling. Integr Zool 7:402–409.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23253371)), tumpang tindih dengan habitat cocok tapir dikuantifikasi (nilai logistik ≥0.5 menunjukkan
habitat yang cocok .
Prediksi oleh model MAXENT , bagaimanapun, memiliki
kelemahan tertentu . Mereka tidak memperhitungkan deteksi yang tidak sempurna , dan indeks tidak langsung berkaitan dengan
probabilitas yang terjadi , ukuran yang lebih informatif tentang pentingnya
habitat .
Ketika sumber daya yang tersedia untuk kuantifikasi
lebih mendalam dari pentingnya habitat mamalia , Data deteksi / non - deteksi
yang diperoleh dari survei yang dilakukan di bawah kerangka hunian dapat digunakan untuk menghasilkan peta hunian
atau peta habitat menggunakan intensitas yang memperhitungkan pendeteksian
tidak sempurna . Kami memperoleh data tersebut dari survei kamera - perangkap
untuk menghasilkan peta intensitas habitat guna untuk spesies yang sama , yang terancam punah
Tapir Asia ( S2 Method) . Data dikumpulkan dari dua blok hutan ( bawah dan atas
) di kedua sisi State Road 156 , jalan yang diidentifikasi oleh salah satu ahli
di Semenanjung Malaysia (lihat untuk metode survei(Clements GR (2013) The environmental and social
impacts of roads in Southeast Asia. Ph.D. Thesis, James Cook University.
http://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/31888/) ) . Selanjutnya , kita menghitung perkiraan rata rata penggunaan habitat
dari Tapir Asia yang dipengaruhi oleh jalur jalan .
The 2nd part of the total 15 parts
Source
PLoS One. 2014; 9(12): e115376.
Published online 2014 Dec 18. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115376
PMCID: PMC4270763
...................................................
Label
: Dimana dan Bagaimana sarana Jalanan Membahayakan Mamalia di Hutan Asia Tenggara ?
,Dimana,Bagaimana ,sarana,Jalanan,
Membahayakan,Mamalia,di Hutan,Asia Tenggara,
biodiversity,habitat,lingkungan,komunitas,ekosistim,indonesia,vegetasi,hayati,satwa,
wildlife,hewan,binatang,keaneka
ragaman,konservasi,hutan,tropis,langka,in situ,ek situ,semarang,
komunitas reptil,komunitas
satwa,hewan,tanaman,retic box.
...................................................................
...................................................................
S1 Table
Summary of 16
existing roads contributing to forest conversion of mammal habitats and hunting
of endangered mammals according to 36 experts from seven countries in Southeast
Asia (number of experts who responded/number of experts contacted).
Table S1. Summary of 16 existing roads
contributing to forest conversion of mammal habitats and hunting of endangered
mammals according to 36 experts from each country (number of experts who
responded/number of experts contacted) in Southeast Asia.
Country
|
Existing road
(network)
|
Threatened
endangered mammal habitats
|
Endangered mammals
recorded (historically and currently) in habitats
|
Cambodia (4/4)
|
National Highway 4
|
Kirirom and Bokor NP
|
Asian Elephant,
Banteng, Eld's Deer, Tiger, Pileated Gibbon [1], [2]
|
Provincial Road
Network 76-141
|
Eastern Plains
Landscape*
|
Asian Elephant, Banteng, Black-shanked Douc Langur, Eld's Deer, Tiger,
Yellow-cheeked Crested Gibbon [3]
|
|
National Road 48
|
Cardamom Mountains^
|
Asian Elephant,
Dhole, Pileated Gibbon, Tiger [4]
|
|
Indonesia
|
|||
Kalimantan (5/5)
|
Bontang-Sangata Road
|
Kutai NP
|
Banteng, Bornean
Orangutan, Bornean Gibbon [5], [6], [7]
|
Balikpapan-Samarinda
Road
|
Bukit Soeharto RF
|
Bornean Gibbon,
Sunda Otter Civet [8],
[9]
|
|
Logging road
networks
|
Priority sites for
Orangutan conservation#
|
Banteng, Bornean
Orangutan [10], [5]
|
|
Sumatra (7/8)
|
Sanggi-Bengkunat/Krui
Liwa Roads
|
Bukit Barisan
Selatan NP
|
Agile Gibbon, Asian
Elephant, Asian Tapir, Siamang, Sumatran Rhino, Tiger [11]
|
Blangkejeren-Kutacane
Road
|
Gunung Leuser NP
|
Asian Elephant, Sumatran Orangutan, Sumatran
Rhino, Tiger [12]
|
|
Logging road
networks
|
Tiger conservation
landscapes†
|
Asian Elephant,
Sumatran Orangutan, Tiger [13], [14]
|
|
Lao PDR (3/3)
|
Route 9
|
Phou Xang He and
Dong Phou Vieng NBCAs
|
Asian Elephant, Douc
Langur, Giant Muntjac, Tiger Cleetus [15]
|
Route Network
12-1E-8
|
Nakai-Nam Theun NBCA
|
Asian Elephant, Dhole, Douc Langur, Giant Muntjac, Yellow-cheeked
Crested Gibbon, Saola, Tiger [16], [17]
|
|
Route Network 17A-3
|
Nam Ha NBCA
|
Asian Elephant,
Black-crested Gibbon, Dhole, Tiger [18], [19]
|
|
Malaysia
|
|||
East (5/7)
|
Kalabakan-Sapulut
Road
|
FRs in Tawau and Pensiangan Districts
|
Asian Elephant,
Sumatran Rhino [20],
[21]
|
Logging road
networks
|
FRs, Kelabit
highlands
|
Banteng, Bornean
Gibbon, Sumatran Rhino [22]
|
|
Access roads for
dams
|
Murum, Danum and
Pileran Valleys
|
Bornean Gibbon [23]
|
|
Peninsular (7/9)
|
Federal Route 4
|
Royal Belum State
Park, Temengor FR
|
Asian Elephant,
Asian Tapir, Siamang, Sunda Pangolin, Tiger, White-handed Gibbon [24]
|
Federal Route 8
|
Taman Negara NP,
Titiwangsa Main Range
|
Asian Elephant,
Asian Tapir, Dhole, Siamang, Sunda Pangolin, Tiger, White-handed Gibbon [25]
|
|
State Route T156
|
Tembat, Petuang and
Hulu Telemong FRs
|
Asian Elephant,
Asian Tapir, Dhole, Sunda Pangolin, Tiger,
White-handed Gibbon [26]
|
|
Myanmar (1/3)
|
Wildlife trade route
network
|
All mammal habitats
in Myanmar
|
See Results
|
Roads in E, W and NW
sector
|
Alaungdaw Kathapa NP
|
Asian Elephant, Banteng, Dhole, Tiger [27], [28]
|
|
Ledo road
|
Hukaung Valley WS
|
Tiger [29]
|
|
Vietnam (3/3)
|
Ho Chi Minh Highway
|
Protected areas§
|
Asian Elephant,
Delacour's Langur, Northern White-cheeked Gibbon, Red-shanked Douc, Saola,[30], [31]
|
Roads in banteng
habitats
|
Ea So, Yok Don and
Krong Trai NR, Vinh Cuu NP
|
Banteng [32]
|
|
Roads in
|
Cat Tien NP
|
Asian Elephant,
Javan Rhino (hunted to extinction during time of writing) [33], [34]
|
|
* Mondulkiri PF, Seima BCA, Lumphat, Snuol, Phnum Prech and
Phnum Namlier WS
^ Phnum Samkos and Phnum Aural WS, Central Cardamom PF
# Gunung Palung, Danau Sentarum/Bentung Kerihun, Tanjung
Puting, Belantikan, Gunung Gajah/Berau/Kelai, Sebangau
† Kerinci Seblat NP, Tesso Nilo and Bukit Tigapuluh
landscapes, Bukit Rambang Baling, Kuala Kampar-Kerumutan, Rimbo Panti-Batang
Gadu, proHUsed Senepis-Buluhala Tiger National Park
§ Cuc Phuong and Phong Nha-Ke Bang NP, Vu Quang NR
NOTE: BCA = Biodiversity Conservation Area; FR = Forest
Reserve; PA = Protected Area; PF = Protection Forest; NBCA = National
Biodiversity Conservation Area; NP = National Park; NS = Nature Reserve; RF =
Recreation Forest; WS = Wildlife Sanctuary
References
1.
Protected Areas Development (2004) Field study: Cambodia,
Bokor, Kirirom, Kep and Ream National Park, Protected Areas and Development in
the Lower Mekong River Region. Available:
http://www.mekong-protected-areas.org/cambodia/docs/cambodia_field.pdf.
Accessed 03 Aug 2014.
2.
Http 1: Kirirom National Park. Available:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirirom_National_Park. Accessed 03 Aug 2014.
3.
Walston J, Davidson P, Men Soriyun NY (2001) A wildlife
survey of Southern Mondulkiri Province, Cambodia. Phnom Penh: Wildlife
Conservation Society (Cambodia Programme). 80 p.
4.
Daltry JC, Momberg, F (2000) Biological survey of the
Cardamom mountains, southwestern Cambodia. Cambridge: Fauna and Flora
International, Government of Cambodia, Ministry of Environment and Wildlife
Protection Office. 20 p.
5.
Wich SA, Meijaard E, Marshall AJ, Husson S,
Ancrenaz M, et al. (2008) Distribution and conservation of the orang-utan (Pongo spp.) on Borneo and Sumatra: how
many remain? Oryx 42: 329-339.
6.
Setiawan A, Nugroho TS, Djuwantoko, Pudyatmoko S (2009) A
survey of Miller’s Grizzled Surili,
Presbytis hosei canicurus, in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Primate Conserv
24: 139-143.
7.
MONGABAY.COM (2009) Orangutan Population in Borneo Park
Plunges 90% in 5 years. MONGABAY.COM. Available:
http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0517-Orangutans_kutai.html. Accessed 03 Aug 2014.
8.
Yasuma S (1994) An invitation to the mammals of East
Kalimantan. Jakarta: Pusrehut Special Publication no. 3, Tropical Rainforest
Project, Japan International Cooperation Agency, Directorate General of Higher
Education and Ministry of Education and Culture. 384 p.
9.
Oka T, Uskander E, Ghozali DI (2000) Effects of forest
fragmentation on the behaviour of Bornean gibbons. In: Guhardja E, Fatawi M,
Sutisna M, Mori T, Ohta S, editors. Rainforest ecosystems of East Kalimantan:
El Nino, drought, fire and human impacts. Tokyo: Ecological studies 140,
Springer-Verlag. pp. 229-238.
10. Orangutan Conservation
Services Program (2007) OCSP threat analysis and site selection for Kalimantan
and Sumatra. Available: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pnadl978.pdf. Accessed 03
Aug 2014.
11. O'Brien T, Kinnaird MF
(1996) Birds and mammals of the Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia
Oryx: 30: 207-217.
12. Singleton I, Wich S, Husson
S, Stephens S, Atmoko SU et al., editors (2004) Orangutan population and
habitat viability assessment: final report. Apple Valley: IUCN/SSC Conservation
Breeding Specialist Group. 235 p.
13. Dinerstein E, Loucks C,
Heydlauff A, Wikramanayake E, Bryja, G et al. (2006) Setting priorities for the conservation and recovery of wild tigers:
2005-2015: A user's guide. Washington DC: World Wildlife Fund, Wildlife
Conservation Society, Smithsonian, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation-Save
the Tiger Fund. 50 p.
14. Eyes on the Forest (2008)
Asia Pulp and Paper threatens Senepis forest, Sumatran tiger habitat, and
global climate. Riau: Eyes on the Forest 15 p..
15. Cleetus R (2005) Lao PDR:
Using strategic environmental vulnerabilities assessment (SEVA) for evaluating
threats to forests. Washington DC: WWF-Macroeconomics Program Office. 7 p.
16. Timmins RJ, Evans TD (1996)
A wildlife and habitat survey of the Nakai-Nam Theun National Biodiversity
Conservation Area, Khammouane and Bolikhamsai Provinces, Laos. Vientiane:
Department of Forestry, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, The Wildlife
Conservation Society. 59 p.
17. Timmins RJ, Duckworth JW
(2004) Status and conservation of Douc Langurs (Pygathrix nemaeus) in Laos. Int J Primatol 20: 469-489.
18. Tizard R, Davidson P,
Kamkhoun, Salivong K (1997) A wildlife and habitat survey of Nam Ha and Nam
Kong Protected Areas, Luang Namtha Province, Lao PDR. Vientiane: Department of Resource
Conservation, Wildlife Conservation Society Cooperative Program, Department of
Forestry.
19. Johnson A, Singh S,
Duangdala M, Hedemark M (2005) The western black crested gibbon Nomascus
concolor in Laos, new records and
conservation status. Oryx 39: 311-317.
20. Unet R (2009) Concern over
Sapulut-Kalabakan Highway. Available:
http://sabahmajujaya.blogspot.com/2009/03/concern-over-sapulut-kalabakan-highway.html.
Accessed 03 Aug 2014.
21. Ambu LN, Andua PM, Nathan
S, Tuuga A, Jensen SM et al. Asian Elephant Action Plan Sabah (Malaysia). Kota
Kinabalu: Sabah Wildlife Department.
22. Abdullah MT, Lakim M, Abdul Rahman MA (1999) Notes
on large mammals of Bario, Sarawak. In: Ismail G, Laily DD, editors. A
scientific journey through Borneo, Bario, the Kelabit highlands of Sarawak.
Kuching: Pelanduk Publications. pp. 221-222.
23. Then S (02 Nov 2009) Murum
Dam: More than 100 Wildlife Species at Risk. The Star. Available:
http://www.thestar.com.my/story.aspx?file=%2f2009%2f11%2f2%2fnation%2f20091102152540&sec=nation.
Accessed 03 Aug 2014.
24. Rayan DM, Lau CF, Goh SS,
Mohamad S, Wong CTC, Siwan ES, Hamirul M, Mohamed A (2012) Management
recommendations on ecological linkages: findings from a study on large mammal
habitat use within the Belum-Temengor corridor. Petaling Jaya: WWF-Malaysia. 35
p.
25.
Kawanishi K, Sunquist ME (2004) Conservation status of tigers
in a primary rainforest of Peninsular Malaysia. Biol Conserv 120: 329-344.
26. Clements GR (2013) The
environmental and social impacts of roads in Southeast Asia. Ph.D. Thesis,
James Cook University. Available: http://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/31888/,
Accessed 03 Aug 2014.
27. Wildlife Conservation
Society (2002) Development of an Action Plan; Myanmar Tiger Conservation - II.
Yangon. Available: http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/docs2/MyanmarReport1.pdf.
Accessed 03 Aug 2014.
28. Lynam AJ, Rabinowitz A,
Myint T, Maung M, Latt KT et al. (2009) Estimating abundance with sparse data:
tigers in northern Myanmar. Popul Ecol 51: 115-121.
29. Rabinowitz A (2004) A
question of balance. Natl Geogr 205: 98-117.
30. Eve R, Madhavan S, Dzung VV
(2000) Spatial planning for nature conservation in Vu Quang Nature Reserve: a
landscape ecology approach. Hanoi: World Wide Fund for Nature-Indochina
Program. 158 p.
31. Reuters (29 Oct 2001)
Vietnam’s New Highway may Cut through Reserve. Reuters Newswire. Available:
http://www.iol.co.za/scitech/technology/vietnam-s-new-highway-may-cut-through-reserve-1.76017#.U95qOvmSw2I.
Accessed 03 Aug 2014.
32. Pedrono M, Tuan HA,
Chouteau P, Vallejo F (2009) Status and distribution of the endangered banteng
(Bos javinicus birmanicus) in
Vietnam: a conservation tragedy. Oryx 43: 618-625.
33. Polet G, Ling S (2004)
Protecting mammal diversity: opportunities and constraints for pragmatic
conservation management in Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam. Oryx 38: 186-196.
34. Brook SM, van Coeverden de
Groot P, Scott C, Boag P, Long B et al. (2012) Integrated and novel survey methods for
rhinoceros populations confirm the extinction of Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus from Vietnam. Biol Conserv
155: 59-67.
...................................................................
S2 Method
Method used to generate habitat-use-intensity maps
for the Asian Tapir (Tapirus
indicus) from forests on either side of State Road 156, a
road identified by one of the experts in Peninsular Malaysia.
Method S2. Method used to generate habitat-use-intensity maps for the Asian Tapir
(Tapirus indicus) from forests on
either side of State Road 156, a road identified by one of the experts in
Peninsular Malaysia.
Using a likelihood-based approach
[1], [2] habitat use (
) by this species was estimated from 158 1-km2
cells. Detection histories (H) were constructed over four temporal sampling
occasions (15 trap nights each) to calculate detection probabilities (p) accounting for imperfect detection.
For example, a detection history for cell i
(Hi) of ‘1001’ from four
sampling occasions represents detection on the 1st and 4th
occasions, and non-detection on the 2nd and 3rd occasions.
The probability of recording history Hi
would be,
) by this species was estimated from 158 1-km2
cells. Detection histories (H) were constructed over four temporal sampling
occasions (15 trap nights each) to calculate detection probabilities (p) accounting for imperfect detection.
For example, a detection history for cell i
(Hi) of ‘1001’ from four
sampling occasions represents detection on the 1st and 4th
occasions, and non-detection on the 2nd and 3rd occasions.
The probability of recording history Hi
would be,
Pr
(Hi = 1001) = ψi [pi1 (1 – pi2)
(1 – pi3) pi4]
where ψi is the probability that cell i is occupied and pi j
is the probability of detecting the species at cell i during sampling duration j
(= 1, 2, 3 and 4), conditional upon the species being present.
To explicitly
account for variation in detection probability (p), two sampling covariates were included in models: (1) number of
trap nights that cameras were operational during each sampling occasion; and
(2) daily rainfall recorded from closest official weather station. Four site
covariates that could affect Asian Tapir habitat use were also included: 1)
distance to State Road 156;
2) distance to nearest plantation; 3) distance to a nearby reservoir; and 4)
forest cover type as a proxy of logging intensity (1 - relatively intact
lowland forest, 2 – disturbed lowland forest from a 2010 land cover layer
derived from MODIS 250-m resolution satellite images; [3]). Site covariates
were measured at the centroid of each 1-km2 cell. After testing for collinearity among continuous
and categorical covariates using the hetcor
function implemented in the polycor library in R statistical environment 3.0.0 [4], we retained covariates with
coefficients <|0.5| for model construction. All continuous covariates were
normalized to z-scores prior to modeling.
To account for
imperfect detection, we adopted a two-step process under the single-species, single-season occupancy framework in
PRESENCE v5.3 software [5]. First, to model detection probability (p),
this parameter was assumed constant or allowed to vary with individual sampling
covariates or with both combined, while all site covariates were included in
each model [6]. The top-ranked model for detection probability was then used to
examine the influence of site covariates on habitat use (ψ). This parameter was assumed constant or allowed to vary with
individual or additively combined site covariates. Models were ranked using
Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC) corrected for small sample size and
evaluated for goodness-of-fit against 999 simulated bootstrap datasets [7]. The
top-ranked model was used to map habitat-use intensities at 1 km2
resolution and four levels of habitat-use intensities were defined with the Spatial Join function in ArcGIS
v10 based on natural breaks (ESRI, Redlands).
References
1.
MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD,
Lachman GB, Droege S, Royle JA et al. (2002) Estimating site occupancy rates
when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecology 83:
2248-2255.
2.
MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Sutton
N, Kawanishi K, Bailey LL (2005) Improving inferences in population studies of
rare species that are detected imperfectly. Ecology 86:
1101-1113.
3.
Miettinen J, Shi C, Tan WJ,
Liew SC (2012) 2010 land cover map of insular Southeast Asia in 250-m spatial
resolution. Remote Sens Lett 3: 11-20.
4.
R Development Core Team (2013)
R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation
for Statistical Computing.
5.
Hines JE (2006) Presence V5.3 - software to estimate patch
occupancy and related parameters.
Laurel: United States Geological Service-Patuxent Wildlife Reseach
Center. Available: http://www.mbr-pwrc.gov/software/presence.html.
Accessed 05 Aug 2014
6.
MacKenzie DI (2006) Modeling
the probability of resource use: The effect of, and dealing with, detecting a
species imperfectly. J Wildlife Manag 70: 367-374.
7.
MacKenzie DI, Bailey LI,
Nichols JD (2004) Investigating species co-occurrence patterns when species are
detected imperfectly. J Anim Ecol 73: 546-555.