The Perception of Fragmented Landscape by Neotropical Marsupials

1. What is the research question or problem being presented? (The topic helps but is not all that is needed in the answer. Go beyond the issue to determine the question or challenge the authors are grappling with in the study.)

Animals to make the required perception of landscapes and in making inferences concerning functional connectivity concerning habitat patches mostly use perception range. The research question concerning the general topic is directed to determine effects of environmental variables and body masses (Forero-Medina & Vieira, 2009). The research also aims at making an analysis of the body masses in conjunction with the environmental variables and life historic traits.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

2. How is or are the author/s attempting to address the issue? (This is asking for a brief outline of the materials and methods used by the authors.)

The author conducted release experiments and made various orientations towards the forests to be able to determine the results using the spool-and-line technique. The number of animals used was 111. The findings outlined that Didelphis aurita portrayed to have the highest perceptual range which was 200m (Forero-Medina & Vieira, 2009). The author estimated the perceptual range using Mech and Zollner. The common determinants were the distance from the forest amid considering the importance of grass height. Wind calculated the orientation of Didelphis Aurita through the portrayal of anemotactic behavior.

3. Identify any potential problems with the way in which the data were collected. (This includes what one may see as limitations, whether identified by the authors or not.)

There was overestimation of data. For instance, perceptual range was generally overestimated on the basis of Mech and Zollner even though the species were ordered in perceptual ranges according to their body sizes (Forero-Medina & Vieira, 2009). It was discovered that other variables other than distance were supposed to be considered to make a clear judgement of the results of the study.

4. What were statistical methods used to analyze the data? (Here the computer programs or software, analytical methods like Chi-square, ANOVA, etc., not tables and graphs.)

Mech and Zollner's formula was used for predicting perceptual range. For instance, equation one was as shown below; S =0.538390.00052M (1) S was the predicted slope concerning the species regression whereas M was the mass of the species. On the other hand, the formula; D = (ADcrit/S)(H/15.5) (2) was also used where ADcrtt was the critical angular divergence value that was to determine perceptual range which was between 63o and 69o (Forero-Medina & Vieira, 2009). H is the height of the desired forest.

5. If you identified problems in #3, how would correcting these problems affect the analysis of the data or the conclusions? (Do not leave any question blank. It will be interpreted as an omission. Say something.)

To correct overestimation of data, it is viable to identify the required population to deal with before storming into the field to capture data (Forero-Medina & Vieira, 2009). There was supposed to be the use of various forms of data collection to enhance the accuracy of the results.

6. How do the data support or fail to support the predictions? (The emphasis is the first word 'How'. Be sure to address this.)

Capture and recapture method as employed worked well since the researcher was able to capture P. frenatus (31 males and 19 females) and the recapture was able to grab 20 males and 11 females. There was the use of angular orientation with a clear identification of p, u and n values.

7. What conclusions does the author draw from the work? Do you agree? (Some people forget to say whether they agree or not. Remember to respond to that part of the question also.)

It was concluded that distance to a habitat patch is an essential variable towards determining the required orientation in a heterogeneous landscape like grass and the movement of the wind (Forero-Medina & Vieira, 2009). Models of functional connectivity must be used to determine the fragmented landscapes.

8. What are the implications of this work? (This is referring to how the study can be applied in the future - it could be method-wise, result-wise, knowledge-wise, etc.)

It was discovered that the size of the body and other environmental factors tend to affect the orientation abilities of the marsuptals. Method-wise, body weight is not considered to be a factor that affect perceptual range. The variables were negatively related to fragment with grass and body mass.

9. How does this study relate to what you have done or will do in this course? (Again, the operative word is 'How' - what topics it may be dealing with as regards the study of Ecology in the classroom.)

This research has opened up various strategies to avoid discrepancies that are related to research which involves the study with animals and humans without their consent (Forero-Medina & Vieira, 2009). The study of ecology requires the use of various strategies and application of statistical approaches to interpret the findings.

10.What suggestion can you give to the author/s to improve or follow up on the study? (This can come out of your observations of limitations as you indicated above or any other ideas.)

The author requires to identify the conclusion of the research done in a concise summary that identifies the findings regarding the method used in the study.

Reference

Forero-Medina, G., & Vieira, M. V. (2009). Perception of a fragmented landscape by neotropical marsupials: effects of body mass and environmental variables. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 25(1), 53-62.