Dr. Marcus Lashley Flashcards
Where did Dr. Lashley receive his bachelor’s degree?
What was his major/concentration?
- More Info Needed -
Where did Dr. Lashley receive his master’s degree?
What was his major/concentration?
Dr. Lashley received his Master of Science degree from the University of Tennessee.
- More Info Needed -
Where did Dr. Lashley receive his doctoral degree?
What was his major/concentration?
Dr. Lashley received a Doctor of Philosophy degree from North Carolina State University.
- More Info Needed -
What are Dr. Lashley’s research interests?
Dr. Lashley is primarily interested in disturbance ecology
Where is Dr. Lashley employed?
What is his job title?
Dr. Lashley is employed at the University of Florida in the Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation as an assistant professor.
Summarize Dr. Lashley’s recent publication:
Reduced vertebrate diversity independent of spatial scale following feral swine invasions
Biological invasions often have contrasting consequences with reports of invasions
decreasing diversity at small scales and facilitating diversity at large scales. Thus, previous literature has concluded that invasions have a fundamental spatial scaledependent relationship with diversity. Whether the scale‐dependent effects apply
to vertebrate invaders is questionable because studies consistently report that vertebrate
invasions produce different outcomes than plant or invertebrate invasions. Namely, vertebrate invasions generally have a larger effect size on species richness and vertebrate invaders commonly cause extinction, whereas extinctions are rare following invertebrate or plant invasions. In an agroecosystem invaded by a non‐native
ungulate (i.e., feral swine, Sus scrofa), we monitored species richness of native
vertebrates in forest fragments ranging across four orders of magnitude in area. We tested three predictions of the scale‐dependence hypothesis: (a) Vertebrate species richness would positively increase with area, (b) the species richness y‐intercept would be lower when invaded, and (c) the rate of native species accumulation with
area would be steeper when invaded. Indeed, native vertebrate richness increased
with area and the species richness was 26% lower than should be expected when the
invasive ungulate was present. However, there was no evidence that the relationship
was scale dependent. Our data indicate the scale‐dependent effect of biological invasions
may not apply to vertebrate invasions.
Summarize Dr. Lashley’s recent publication:
Estimating wildlife activity curves: comparison of methods and sample size
Camera traps and radiotags commonly are used to estimate animal activity curves. However, little
empirical evidence has been provided to validate whether they produce similar results. We compared activity curves from two common camera trapping techniques to those from radiotags with four species that varied substantially in size (~1 kg–~50 kg), diet (herbivore, omnivore, carnivore), and mode of activity (diurnal and crepuscular). Also, we sub-sampled photographs of each species with each camera trapping technique to determine the minimum sample size needed to maintain accuracy and precision of estimates. Camera trapping estimated greater activity during feeding times than radiotags in all but the carnivore, likely reflective of the close proximity of foods readily consumed by all species except the carnivore (i.e., corn bait or acorns). However, additional analyses still indicated both camera trapping methods produced relatively high overlap and correlation to radiotags. Regardless of species or camera trapping method, mean overlap increased and overlap error decreased rapidly as sample sizes increased until an asymptote near 100 detections which we therefore recommend as a minimum sample size.
Researchers should acknowledge that camera traps and radiotags may estimate the same mode of activity but differ in their estimation of magnitude in activity peaks.
