Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.

You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content
Fig. 3 | Movement Ecology

Fig. 3

From: How do non-independent host movements affect spatio-temporal disease dynamics? Partitioning the contributions of spatial overlap and correlated movements to transmission risk

Fig. 3

A The correlation-spatial overlap ratio (CSR(x)) for two hosts moving according to an OU process with \(\sigma = 150 m\) with an attracting point at (0, 0). The different colored lines show different levels of social attraction between the two hosts, \(\xi\). The dashed line shows when non-independent movement and spatial overlap have the same contribution to FOI. The drift coefficient is \(c = 1 \text { hour}^{-1}\). B Same as A., but with a drift coefficient of \(c = 0.005 \text { hour}^{-1}\). C Example trajectories from two hosts moving with \(c = 1 \text { hour}^{-1}\) and \(\xi = 0.9\). Locations are recorded every 10 min and trajectories are over 60 days. D. Same as C., but with \(c = 0.005 \text { hour}^{-1}\)

Back to article page

Movement Ecology

ISSN: 2051-3933