A meta-analysis of home range studies in the context of trophic levels: Implications for policy-based conservation

Home ranges have been widely-used as ecological tools, though using home range estimates in decision-support for conservation biology is a relatively new idea. However, trophic levels are rarely taken into consideration when estimating home range. This lapse could present issues when interpreting past studies, especially in policy-based conservation. The objectives of this study were to survey the current literature, to critically analyse published articles with home range analyses, and to compare home range size by species’ trophic level. We predicted that animals residing in higher trophic levels would have significantly larger home ranges than animals occupying lower trophic levels. We found that terrestrial carnivores had larger home ranges than terrestrial herbivores, though terrestrial mesocarnivores had the largest home ranges. We also found that aquatic herbivores had larger home ranges than both aquatic carnivores and aquatic mesocarnivores. Our results are important to consider for planning and management sectors, to avoid the implementation of ineffective conservation policies.家域（home range）已被广泛用作生态学研究工具，但将家域估算结果应用于保护生物学的决策支持仍是相对较新的理念。然而，在估算家域时，营养级（trophic level）因素极少被纳入考量。这种疏漏在解读既往研究成果时可能引发问题，在基于政策的保护工作中尤为突出。本研究的目标为：调研当前相关学术文献，批判性分析已发表的家域分析类论文，并基于物种的营养级对比其家域面积。我们预测：处于较高营养级的动物，其家域面积会显著大于较低营养级的动物。研究结果显示，陆生食肉动物的家域面积大于陆生植食动物，而陆生中型食肉动物的家域面积最大。同时，水生植食动物的家域面积大于水生食肉动物与水生中型食肉动物。本研究结果可为规划与管理部门提供重要参考，以避免推行低效的保护政策。