Theoretical Ecology

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 325–339 | Cite as

Classifying area-restricted search (ARS) using a partial sum approach

Original Paper

Abstract

Many animals perform two distinct alternating movement strategies when foraging: intensive searches with low speed and high turning to cover a small area in high detail and extensive searches with high speed and low turning to cover a large area in low detail. Observed movement paths will tend to exhibit differences in speed and correlation between these different search strategies. Identifying transitions between strategies can enable one to acquire information regarding both the distribution of resources and the underlying behavioural mechanisms performed by a foraging animal. Methods such as the moving average, first-passage time, residence time and fractal landscape methods have been used to identify behavioural states of various real and simulated foragers. We provide a review of these current methods and identify a set of common limitations associated with each procedure. We develop a new mathematical approach: the partial sum method, which is designed to avoid these limitations. A comprehensive test is undertaken to evaluate and compare the performance of the partial sum and the existing methods using a carefully constructed set of computer-generated movement paths. Each simulated track was designed to replicate the possible paths performed by an animal under different foraging conditions. Our results provide strong evidence that the partial sum method is better than existing analytical methods for identifying transitions between two different search strategies.

Keywords

Area-restricted search (ARS) First-passage time Fractal Movement analysis Random walk Residence time 

Supplementary material

12080_2011_130_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (106 kb)
Supplementary Material(PDF 1.34 MB)

References

  1. Baker LG, Gollub J (1996) Chaotic dynamics: an introduction. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banks JC (1954) The searching behaviour of coccinellid larvae. Anim Behav 28:37–38Google Scholar
  3. Barraquand F, Benhamou S (2008) Animal movements in heterogeneous landscapes: identifying profitable areas and homogeneous movement bouts. Ecology 89:3336–3348PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartumeus F, Levin SA (2008) Fractal reorientation clocks: linking animal behaviour to statistical patterns of search. PNAS 105:19072–19077PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartumeus F (2009) Behavioural intermittence, Lévy patterns, and randomness in animal movement. Oikos 118:488–494Google Scholar
  6. Benhamou S (2007) How many animals really do the Lévy walk? Ecology 88:1962–1969PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bond BA (1980) Optimal foraging in a uniform habitat: the search mechanism of the green lacewing. Anim Behav 28:10–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bossel H (1994) Modeling and simulation. Peters, USAGoogle Scholar
  9. Boyd LI (1996) Temporal scales of foraging in a marine predator. Ecology 77:426–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cazelles B, Chavez M, Berteaux FM, Vik JO, Jenouvrier S, Stenseth NC (2008) Wavelet analysis of ecological time series. Oecologia 156:287–304PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chandler FE (1969) Locomotory behaviour of first instar larvae of aphidophagous Syrphidae (Diptera) after contact with aphids. Anim Behav 17:673–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Codling EA, Hill NA (2005) Sampling rate effects on measurements of correlated and biased random walks. J Theor Biol 233:573–588PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Codling EA, Plank MJ (2010) Turn designation, sampling rate and the misidentification of power-laws in movement path data using maximum likelihood estimates. J Theor Ecol. doi:10.1007/s12080-010-0086-9 Google Scholar
  14. Codling EA, Plank MJ, Benhamou S (2008) Random walk models in biology. J R Soc Interface 5:813–834PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Curio E (1976) The ethology of predation. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Dicke M, Burrough AP (1988) Using fractal dimensions for characterizing the tortuosity of animal trails. Physiol Entomol 13:393–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Edwards AM, Phillips RA, Watkins NW, Freeman MP, Murphy EJ, Afanasyev V, Buldyrev SV, da Luz MGE, Raposo EP, Stanley HE, Viswanathan GM (2007) Revisiting Lévy flight search patterns of wandering albatrosses, bumblebees and deer. Nature 449:1044–1048PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fauchald P, Tvera T (2003) Using first-passage time in the analysis of area-restricted search and habitat selection. Ecology 84:282–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Flanders E (1947) Elements of host discovery exemplified by parasitic hymenoptera. Ecology 28:299–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ford RG (1983) Home range in a patchy environment: optimal foraging predictions. Am Zool 23:315–326Google Scholar
  21. Giuggioli L, Bartumeus F (2009) Animal movement, search strategies, and behavioural ecology: across-disciplinary way forward. J Anim Ecol 79:906–909Google Scholar
  22. Gutenkunst R, Newlands N, Lutcavage M, Edelstein-Keset L (2007) Inferring resource distributions from Atlantic bluefin tuna movements: an analysis based on net displacement and length of track. J Theor Biol 245:243–257PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harrison R, Lin Z, Carroll GR, Carley KM (2007) Time series and dynamic models. Acad Manage Rev 32:1229–1245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hawkins MD, Olwell HD (1998) Cumulative sum charts and charting for quality improvement. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Jonsen ID, Flemming JM, Myers RA (2005) Robust state-space modeling of animal movement data. Ecology 86:2874–2880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kareiva MP, Odell G (1987) Swarms of predators exhibit preytaxis if individual predators use area-restricted search. Am Nat 130:233–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Laing J (1937) Host-finding by insect parasites. In: Observations on the finding of hosts by Alysia manducator, Mormoniella vitripennis and Trichogramma evanescens. J Anim Ecol 6:298–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Le Boeuf JB, Crocker ED, Costa PD, Blackwell BS, Webb MP, Houser SD (2000) Foraging ecology of northern elephant seals. Ecol Monogr 70:353–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mandelbrot B (1967) How long is the coast of Britain? Statistical self-similarity and fractional dimension. Science 156:636–638PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Morales JM, Haydon DT, Frair J, Holsinger KE, Fryxell JM (2004) Extracting more out of relocation data: building movement models as mixtures of random walks. Ecology 85:2436–2445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Newell GF (1962) Asymptotic extreme value distributions for one dimensional diffusions. J Math Mech 11:481–496Google Scholar
  32. Plank MJ, Codling EA (2009) Sampling rate and misidentification of Lévy and non-Lévy movement paths. Ecology 90:3546–3553PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Polansky L, Wittemyer G, Cross PC, Tambling CJ, Wayne GM (2010) From moonlight to movement and synchronized randomness: Fourier and wavelet analyses of animal location time series data. Ecology 91:1506–1518PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Robinson WP, Tremblay ED, Crocker AM, Kappes EC, Kuhn AS, Shaffer ES, Simmons ES, Costa PD (2007) A comparison of indirect measures of feeding behaviour based on ARGOS tracking data. Deep-Sea Res Pt II 54:356–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tel T, Gruiz M (2006) Chaotic dynamics: an introduction based on classical mechanics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tong H (1993) Dimension estimation and models. World Scientific, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  37. Tremblay Y, Roberts JA, Costa PD (2007) Fractal landscape method: an alternative to measuring area-restricted searching behavior. J Exp Biol 210:935–945PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tuckwell HC, Wan FM (1984) First-passage time of Markov processes to moving barriers. J Appl Probab 21:695–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Turchin P (1996) Fractal analysis of animal movement: a critique. Ecology 77:2086–2090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Viswanathan GM, Afanasyev V, Buldyrev S, Murphy EJ, Prince PA, Stanley HE (1996) Lévy flight search patterns of wandering albatrosses. Nature 381:413–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Viswanathan GM, Buldyrev SV, Havlin S, da Luz MGE, Raposo EP, Stanley HE (1999) Optimizing the success of random searches. Nature 401:911–914PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wiens AJ (1976) Population responses to patchy environments. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 7:81–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematical SciencesUniversity of EssexColchesterUK
  2. 2.Departments of Mathematical Sciences and Biological SciencesUniversity of EssexColchesterUK

Personalised recommendations