[R-sig-Geo] adehabitatHR: kerneloverlap and kernelUD etc.

[Ellen Pero]

Hello list members:

I have some questions regarding the kerneloverlap function within the
adehabitatHR package, and must offer my apologies if they seem rather base:

-I understand that the comparisons between the HR method for kerneloverlap
and MCP overlap are often misleading. Why doesn't this method make for a
good comparison to MCP area intersection?

-kerneloverlap function computes indices from sets of relocations, whereas
kerneloverlaphr computes indices from estUDs. Why or in what scenarios might
one be preferred over the other?

-I notice in working with the kerneloverlap function that the selected grid
size influences home range overlap. What is the best way to go about
selecting a biologically meaningful grid size?

-When trying to work with the kerneloverlaphr, I am given the warning "In vi
* vj : longer object length is not a multiple of shorter object length". I'm
afraid I can't say I really understand this statement (as each animal has
the same number of relocations) nor what the function is doing with the data
to account for it.

-I also realize that an issue with the kernelUD LSCV estimate is that the
cross-validation criterion sometimes fails to be minimized. But /why / is
this sometimes the case? i.e. what about the relocations might cause this?
And when LSCV method does fail to converge, I understand that the method can
no longer be reliably used. In such cases, is it best to default to another
hr estimate like MCP, or another method for selecting h (href or selective
h?)?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!
Ellen Pero
M.Sc. Candidate
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, MB



--
View this message in context: http://r-sig-geo.2731867.n2.nabble.com/adehabitatHR-kerneloverlap-and-kernelUD-etc-tp7586144.html
Sent from the R-sig-geo mailing list archive at Nabble.com.