your appendix certainly highlights how spatially-simple the Loss et al. 2013 estimate of cat-caused mortality is.… seems like their model could be improved by adding in a metric of urban landcover (e.g. LANDSAT impervious surface).… perhaps hotspots could be highlighted if compared against eBird and/or Partners In Flight data on avian abundance.… I similarly agree, as you allude to, there appear to be opportunities to use urban landcover as an approximation of predator-prey dynamics (via trophic structure, perhaps), but also pitfalls given hyper-local contexts. thanks for the opportunity to think out loud here ….. :)
your appendix certainly highlights how spatially-simple the Loss et al. 2013 estimate of cat-caused mortality is.… seems like their model could be improved by adding in a metric of urban landcover (e.g. LANDSAT impervious surface).… perhaps hotspots could be highlighted if compared against eBird and/or Partners In Flight data on avian abundance.… I similarly agree, as you allude to, there appear to be opportunities to use urban landcover as an approximation of predator-prey dynamics (via trophic structure, perhaps), but also pitfalls given hyper-local contexts. thanks for the opportunity to think out loud here ….. :)