Article

Predicting the Fate of Biodiversity Using Species’ Distribution Models: Enhancing Model Comparability and Repeatability

Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, United States of America.
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.53). 09/2012; 7(9):e44402. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0044402
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Species distribution modeling (SDM) is an increasingly important tool to predict the geographic distribution of species. Even though many problems associated with this method have been highlighted and solutions have been proposed, little has been done to increase comparability among studies. We reviewed recent publications applying SDMs and found that seventy nine percent failed to report methods that ensure comparability among studies, such as disclosing the maximum probability range produced by the models and reporting on the number of species occurrences used. We modeled six species of Falco from northern Europe and demonstrate that model results are altered by (1) spatial bias in species' occurrence data, (2) differences in the geographic extent of the environmental data, and (3) the effects of transformation of model output to presence/absence data when applying thresholds. Depending on the modeling decisions, forecasts of the future geographic distribution of Falco ranged from range contraction in 80% of the species to no net loss in any species, with the best model predicting no net loss of habitat in Northern Europe. The fact that predictions of range changes in response to climate change in published studies may be influenced by decisions in the modeling process seriously hampers the possibility of making sound management recommendations. Thus, each of the decisions made in generating SDMs should be reported and evaluated to ensure conclusions and policies are based on the biology and ecology of the species being modeled.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Roland Jansson, Jul 03, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
96 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The outcome of plant introductions is often considered in binary terms (invasive or non-invasive). However, most species experience a time lag before naturalization occurs, and many species become naturalized at some sites but not at others. It is therefore important to understand the site-specific mechanisms underlying naturalization. Proteaceae is an interesting case as some species are widespread invaders, while others, despite a long history of cultivation, show no signs of naturalization. At least 26 non-native Proteaceae species have been introduced to, and are cultivated in, South Africa. We mapped populations and examined differences between naturalized and non-naturalized populations (e.g. propagule pressure, land use and bioclimatic suitability). Of the 15 species surveyed, 6 were naturalized at one or more sites. Of these, Hakea salicifolia is most widely cultivated, but is only naturalizing in some areas (32 naturalized populations out of 62 populations that were surveyed). We found propagule pressure to be the most important determinant of naturalization for H. salicifolia. However, in suboptimal climatic conditions, naturalization only occurred if micro-site conditions were suitable, i.e. there was some disturbance and water available. For the other naturalized species there were few sites to compare, but we came to similar conclusions – Banksia integrifolia only naturalized at the site where it was planted the longest; Banksia serrata only naturalized at a site influenced by fire regimes; while Banksia formosa naturalized at sites with high propagule pressure, absence of fires and where there is no active clearing of the plants. Naturalization of Proteaceae in South Africa appears to be strongly mediated by site-specific anthropogenic activities (e.g. many planted individuals and water availability). More broadly, we argue that invasion biology needs to focus more closely on the mechanisms by which species and pathways interact to determine the likelihood and consequence of an invasion.
    Acta Oecologica 08/2014; 59:62–71. DOI:10.1016/j.actao.2014.05.005 · 1.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ecological niche models represent key tools in biogeography but the effects of biased sampling hinder their use. Here, we address the utility of two forms of filtering the calibration data set (geographic and environmental) to reduce the effects of sampling bias. To do so we created a virtual species, projected its niche to the Iberian Peninsula and took samples from its binary geographic distribution using several biases. We then built models for various sample sizes after applying each of the filtering approaches. While geographic filtering did not improve discriminatory ability (and sometimes worsened it), environmental filtering consistently led to better models. Models made with few but climatically filtered points performed better than those made with many unfiltered (biased) points. Future research should address additional factors such as the complexity of the species’ niche, strength of filtering, and ability to predict suitability (rather than focus purely on discrimination).
    Ecography 01/2014; 37(11):001-008. DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2013.00441.x · 4.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Diversity and Distributions 01/2011; · 5.47 Impact Factor