Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Shannon L. Murphie

Publications and source records attributed to Shannon L. Murphie.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Where will the cat cross the road? Comparing camera and GPS-based models for identifying wildlife corridors

Designing effective wildlife corridors is a critical conservation challenge in fragmented landscapes. GPS-based step selection functions strongly predict dispersal corridors and connectivity, but GPS collaring can be expensive and invasive. Camera-based occupancy models are widely used for connectivity analyses but may involve trade-offs in data resolution. Despite widespread use of both approaches, few studies have directly compared them using concurrent datasets. We developed a stacked single-species, single-season occupancy model and a Circuitscape connectivity surface for mountain lions (Puma concolor) on Washington’s Olympic Peninsula, USA, and compared them with a connectivity surface from an existing integrated step selection function. Both models predicted mountain lion GPS locations well, with binned Spearman rank correlations of 1 for Circuitscape and 0.96 for the step selection function, though step selection better identified habitat use by dispersers. Connectivity predictions were moderately correlated across the landscape ( r = 0.26), but agreement was strongest in human-dominated areas most critical for corridor planning. We conclude that GPS-based approaches are advantageous when data collection is feasible and the focus is on dispersal or fine-scale movement. However, camera-based approaches may be preferable for multi-species monitoring, large spatial and temporal scales, noninvasive sampling, when resources are limited, or when fine-scale or dispersal-specific inference is not required.

Washington↗

Revisions of rump fat and body scoring indices for deer, elk, and moose

Because they do not require sacrificing animals, body condition scores (BCS), thickness of rump fat (MAXFAT), and other similar predictors of body fat have advanced estimating nutritional condition of ungulates and their use has proliferated in North America in the last decade. However, initial testing of these predictors was too limited to assess their reliability among diverse habitats, ecotypes, subspecies, and populations across the continent. With data collected from mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ), elk ( Cervus elaphus ), and moose ( Alces alces ) during initial model development and data collected subsequently from free-ranging mule deer and elk herds across much of the western United States, we evaluated reliability across a broader range of conditions than were initially available. First, to more rigorously test reliability of the MAXFAT index, we evaluated its robustness across the 3 species, using an allometric scaling function to adjust for differences in animal size. We then evaluated MAXFAT, rump body condition score (rBCS), rLIVINDEX (an arithmetic combination of MAXFAT and rBCS), and our new allometrically scaled rump-fat thickness index using data from 815 free-ranging female Roosevelt and Rocky Mountain elk ( C. e. roosevelti and C. e. nelsoni ) from 19 populations encompassing 4 geographic regions and 250 free-ranging female mule deer from 7 populations and 2 regions. We tested for effects of subspecies, geographic region, and captive versus free-ranging existence. Rump-fat thickness, when scaled allometrically with body mass, was related to ingesta-free body fat over a 38–522-kg range of body mass ( r 2 = 0.87; P < 0.001), indicating the technique is remarkably robust among at least the 3 cervid species of our analysis. However, we found an underscoring bias with the rBCS for elk that had >12% body fat. This bias translated into a difference between subspecies, because Rocky Mountain elk tended to be fatter than Roosevelt elk in our sample. Effects of observer error with the rBCS also existed for mule deer with moderate to high levels of body fat, and deer body size significantly affected accuracy of the MAXFAT predictor. Our analyses confirm robustness of the rump-fat index for these 3 species but highlight the potential for bias due to differences in body size and to observer error with BCS scoring. We present alternative LIVINDEX equations where potential bias from rBCS and bias due to body size are eliminated or reduced. These modifications improve the accuracy of estimating body fat for projects intended to monitor nutritional status of herds or to evaluate nutrition's influence on population demographics.

Journal of Wildlife Diseases↗