Movement of an organism is a fundamental characteristic of life, defined as a change across many spatial and temporal scales (Baker, 1978; Berg, 1993; Nathan et al., 2008). It is a ubiquitous ecological process influencing most facets of individuals' life: the structure and dynamics of populations, communities, and ecosystems (Holloway and Miller, 2017). The organismal movement and environmental changes have been illuminated by research on anthropogenic habitat fragmentation, changes in land-use patterns and climate, and the introduction of alien (Nathan et al., 2008). A more coherent comprehension of reasons, mechanisms, patterns, and outcomes of organismal movement may assist in restoration of degraded habitats and controlling the spread of pests, invasive alien species and infectious diseases (Wiens et al., 1993; Debinski, Ray and Saveraid, 2001; Holyoak et al., 2008).Recent advances in movement research have inspired a shift from the Eulerian approach to the Lagrangian approach. The Eulerian approach quantifies population redistribution while the Lagrangian approach quantifies the movement of individuals ( T urchin, 1998; Y amada et al., 2003; Smouse et al., 2010). It is essential to differentiate between Eulerian (population), and Lagrangian (individual) approaches, as species distribution models (SDMs) incorporating movement are getting more complex (Holloway and Miller, 2017). In spite of substantial impacts of the geographical distribution of species on movement processes and ecological significance, the incorporation of movement has lagged behind other methodological advancements, particularly in species distribution modelling (Franklin, 2010a; Miller and Holloway, 2015). In the context of SDMs, the accessibility of habitats by species or populations has been considered rather than underlying the process of individuals' movement (Guisan and Thuiller, 2005; Elith et al., 2006; Datry, Bonada and Heino, 2016). Movements of individuals incorporate the most detail concerning movement patterns and environmental interactions, but the focus of SDMs is usually on emergent population or species-level patterns (Tang and Bennett, 2010).SDMs are still focusing solely on environment-species relationships to predict the occurrence of species and provide a robust spatial ecological framework for studying the geographic distribution of a wide range of organisms. These models are frequently used to address questions on ecological processes involving climate change, invasion risk and biogeographic hypotheses (Peterson et al., 2011). In addition, the range shifts, responding to changing climate or tracking the spread of invasive species, have been addressed by SDM researchers with terms such as 'dispersal limitations', 'dispersal capacities', 'migration rates', and 'spread rates'. These are used interchangeably to refer to the cumulative movement of a species or a population across a broad temporal scale and often across multiple generations (Alagador, Cerdeira and Araújo, 2014; Holloway, Miller and Gillings, 2016). When dispersal has been considered in SDMs, it has usually referred to one of the two simple approaches: unlimited dispersal or no dispersal (Araújo, Thuiller and Pearson, 2006). Ultimate dispersal assumes that movement has no barriers, and distance is not a limiting factor. Thus, any suitable habitat which is present in the study area can become occupied by species. Inversely, no dispersal assumes that suitable habitat is restricted to locations that overlap with the original distribution (Holloway, Miller and Gillings, 2016)

Date Submitted: 2021-09-18