SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Advances in technology have allowed ecologists to employ remote observations of individual organism's spatial location. These data are used to model species distributions and habitat associations, which inform conservation efforts and management plans. These data are not without error. To illustrate the consequences of not considering measurement error, I introduce measurement error to a habitat selection model, using three different distributions. I show how measurement error can confound inferences made about a hypothetical organism's true habitat selection. By simulating different initial strengths of selection I show the introduction of measurement error results in the largest reduction in habitat selection strength (from truth) for very selective individuals (habitat specialists). Not surprisingly, the inclusion of error in very weakly selective individuals (habitat generalists) can result in a switching from true selection to observed avoidance. Researchers need to be aware that, first, there is measurement error in remotely observed data, and second, a tradeoff occurs between measurement error and landscape fragmentation. Landscapes with a high degree of fragmentation require spatially accurate (low measurement error) data in order to make reliable estimates of habitat selection or species distribution. The results of this study are discussed in light of the conservation of species threatened by habitat fragmentation and the management suggestions arising from selection studies.