Future seasonal changes in habitat for Arctic whales during predicted ocean warming.

Ocean warming is causing shifts in the distributions of marine species, but the location of suitable habitats in the future is unknown, especially in remote regions such as the Arctic. Using satellite tracking data from a 28-year-long period, covering all three endemic Arctic cetaceans (227 individuals) in the Atlantic sector of the Arctic, together with climate models under two emission scenarios, species distributions were projected to assess responses of these whales to climate change by the end of the century. While contrasting responses were observed across species and seasons, long-term predictions suggest northward shifts (243 km in summer versus 121 km in winter) in distribution to cope with climate change. Current summer habitats will decline (mean loss: -25%), while some expansion into new winter areas (mean gain: +3%) is likely. However, comparing gains versus losses raises serious concerns about the ability of these polar species to deal with the disappearance of traditional colder habitats.

A hidden Markov movement model for rapidly identifying behavioral states from animal tracks.

Electronic telemetry is frequently used to document animal movement through time. Methods that can identify underlying behaviors driving specific movement patterns can help us understand how and why animals use available space, thereby aiding conservation and management efforts. For aquatic animal tracking data with significant measurement error, a Bayesian state-space model called the first-Difference Correlated Random Walk with Switching (DCRWS) has often been used for this purpose. However, for aquatic animals, highly accurate tracking data are now becoming more common. We developed a new hidden Markov model (HMM) for identifying behavioral states from animal tracks with negligible error, called the hidden Markov movement model (HMMM). We implemented as the basis for the HMMM the process equation of the DCRWS, but we used the method of maximum likelihood and the R package TMB for rapid model fitting. The HMMM was compared to a modified version of the DCRWS for highly accurate tracks, the DCRWSNOME, and to a common HMM for animal tracks fitted with the R package moveHMM. We show that the HMMM is both accurate and suitable for multiple species by fitting it to real tracks from a grey seal, lake trout, and blue shark, as well as to simulated data. The HMMM is a fast and reliable tool for making meaningful inference from animal movement data that is ideally suited for ecologists who want to use the popular DCRWS implementation and have highly accurate tracking data. It additionally provides a groundwork for development of more complex modeling of animal movement with TMB. To facilitate its uptake, we make it available through the R package swim.

State-space models' dirty little secrets: even simple linear Gaussian models can have estimation problems.

State-space models (SSMs) are increasingly used in ecology to model time-series such as animal movement paths and population dynamics. This type of hierarchical model is often structured to account for two levels of variability: biological stochasticity and measurement error. SSMs are flexible. They can model linear and nonlinear processes using a variety of statistical distributions. Recent ecological SSMs are often complex, with a large number of parameters to estimate. Through a simulation study, we show that even simple linear Gaussian SSMs can suffer from parameter- and state-estimation problems. We demonstrate that these problems occur primarily when measurement error is larger than biological stochasticity, the condition that often drives ecologists to use SSMs. Using an animal movement example, we show how these estimation problems can affect ecological inference. Biased parameter estimates of a SSM describing the movement of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) result in overestimating their energy expenditure. We suggest potential solutions, but show that it often remains difficult to estimate parameters. While SSMs are powerful tools, they can give misleading results and we urge ecologists to assess whether the parameters can be estimated accurately before drawing ecological conclusions from their results.