An Evaluation of the Accuracy of Kernel Density Estimators for Home Range Analysis

D. Erran Seaman and Roger A. Powell
Vol. 77, No. 7 (Oct., 1996), pp. 2075-2085
DOI: 10.2307/2265701
Stable URL:
Page Count: 11
  • Download PDF
  • Cite this Item

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:


Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

An Evaluation of the Accuracy of Kernel Density Estimators for Home Range Analysis


Kernel density estimators are becoming more widely used, particularly as home range estimators. Despite extensive interest in their theoretical properties, little empirical research has been done to investigate their performance as home range estimators. We used computer simulations to compare the area and shape of kernel density estimates to the true area and shape of multimodal two-dimensional distributions. The fixed kernel gave area estimates with very little bias when least squares cross validation was used to select the smoothing parameter. The cross-validated fixed kernel also gave surface estimates with the lowest error. The adaptive kernel overestimated the area of the distribution and had higher error associated with its surface estimate.

Notes and References

This item contains 28 references.

Literature Cited
  • Ackerman, B. B., F A. Leban, E. 0. Garton, and M. D. Samuel. 1990. User's manual for program home range. Second edition. Technical Report 15, Forestry, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station. University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, USA.
  • Boulanger, J. G., and G. C. White. 1990. A comparison of home-range estimators using Monte Carlo simulation. Jour- nal of Wildlife Management 54:310-315.
  • Bowman, A. W. 1985. A comparative study of some kernel- based nonparametric density estimators. Journal of Statis- tical Computing and Simulation 21:313-327.
  • Breiman, L., W. Meisel, and E. Purcell. 1977. Variable kernel estimates of multivariate densities. Technometrics 19:135- 144.
  • Burt, W. H. 1943. Territoriality and home range concepts as applied to mammals. Journal of Mammalogy 24:346-352.
  • Calhoun, J. B., and J. U. Casby. 1958. Public Health Mono- graph Number 55. U.S. Government Printing Office, Wash- ington, D.C., USA.
  • Chiu, S. T. 1991. The effect of discretization error on band- width selection for kernel density estimation. Biometrika 78:436-441.
  • Dixon, K. R., and J. A. Chapman. 1980. Harmonic mean measure of animal activity areas. Ecology 61:1040-1044.
  • Epanechnikov, V. A. 1969. Nonparametric estimation of a multidimensional probability density. Theoretical Proba- bility Applications 14:153-158.
  • Fryer, M. J. 1977. A review of some non-parametric methods of density estimation. Journal of the Institute of Mathe- matics Applications 20:335-354.
  • Gautestad, A. O., and I. Mysterud. 1993. Physical and bi- ological mechanisms in animal movement processes. Jour- nal of Applied Ecology 30:523-535.
  • Hayne, D. W. 1949. Calculation of size of home range. Jour- nal of Mammalogy 30:1-18.
  • Horner, M. A., and R. A. Powell. 1990. Internal structure of home ranges of black bears and analyses of home range overlap. Journal of Mammalogy 71:402-410.
  • Jennrich, R. I., and F B. Turner. 1969. Measurement of non- circular home range. Journal of Theoretical Biology 22: 227-237.
  • Loehle, C. 1990. Home range: a fractal approach. Landscape Ecology 5:39-52.
  • Naef-Daenzer, B. 1993. A new transmitter for small animals and enhanced methods of home-range analysis. Journal of Wildlife Management 57:680-689.
  • Powell, R. A. 1987. Black bear home range overlap in North Carolina and the concept of home range applied to black bears. International Conference on Bear Research and Man- agement 7:235-242.
  • Powell, R. A., J. W. Zimmerman, D. E. Seaman, and J. F Gilliam. 1996. Demographic analyses of a hunted black bear population with access to a refuge. Conservation Bi- ology 10:224-234.
  • Press, W. H., B. P. Flannery, S. A. Teukolsky, and W. T. Vetterling. 1986. Numerical recipes. Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, UK.
  • Silverman, B. W. 1986. Density estimation for statistics and data analysis. Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
  • Smith, A. T, and F S. Dobson. 1994. A technique for eval- uation of spatial data using asymmetrical weighted overlap values. Animal Behavior 48:1285-1292.
  • Swihart, R. K., and N. A. Slade. 1985. Influence of sampling interval on estimates of home range size. Journal of Wild- life Management 49: 1019-1025.
  • Van Winkle, W. 1975. Comparison of several probabilistic home-range models. Journal of Wildlife Management 39: 118-123.
  • White, G. C., and R. A. Garrott. 1990. Analysis of wildlife radio-tracking data. Academic Press, San Diego, Califor- nia, USA.
  • Worton, B. J. 1987. A review of models of home range for animal movement. Ecological Modelling 38:277-298.
  • 1989a. Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home-range studies. Ecology 70:164-168.
  • —1989b. Optimal smoothing parameters for multi- variate fixed and adaptive kernel methods. Journal of Sta- tistical Computing and Simulation 32:45-57.
  • —1995. Using Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate kernel-based home range estimators. Journal of Wildlife Management 59:794-800.