Modeling a spatially restricted distribution in the Neotropics: How the size of calibration area affects the performance of five presence-only methods

Ecological Modelling

Volumn 221, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 215-224

  Giovanelli, João G R ^a   de Siqueira, Marinez Ferreira ^b   Haddad, Célio F B ^a   Alexandrino, João ^a  

^a SÃO PAULO STATE UNIVERSITY UNESP   (Brazil)

^b INSTITUTO DE PESQUISAS JARDIM BOTÂNICO DO RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Amphibia; BIOCLIM; Calibration area; DOMAIN; MAXENT; Minimum presence threshold; OM GARP; Pseudoabsence; SVM

Indexed keywords

AMPHIBIA; ATLANTIC FOREST; BIOCLIM; DISTRIBUTION AREA; ENVIRONMENTAL SPACE; FIELD SURVEYS; HOT SPOT; MAXENT MODELS; MODELING METHOD; NEOTROPICS; PREDICTIVE POWER; SOUTH AMERICA; SPECIES DISTRIBUTION MODELS; SPECIES DISTRIBUTIONS; SVM MODEL;

FORECASTING; SIMULATED ANNEALING; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES;

CALIBRATION;

BIOCLIMATOLOGY; CALIBRATION; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; FOREST FLOOR; FROG; GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION; GPS; NEOTROPICAL REGION; SPECIES OCCURRENCE; TOPOGRAPHIC EFFECT;

ATLANTIC FOREST; BRAZIL; SOUTH AMERICA;

AMPHIBIA; ANURA; HYLIDAE;

EID: 70749114963     PISSN: 03043800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.10.009     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Anderson R.P., Lew D., and Peterson A.T. Evaluating predictive models of species' distributions: criteria for selecting optimal models. Ecol. Model. 162 (2003) 211-232
2. Busby J.R. BIOCLIM: a bioclimate analysis and prediction system. In: Margules C.R., and Austin M.P. (Eds). Nature Conservation: Cost Effective Biological Surveys and Data Analysis (1991), CSIRO, Canberra, Austrália 64-68
3. Carpenter G., Gillison A.N., and Winter J. DOMAIN: a flexible modeling procedure for mapping potential distributions of plants and animals. Biodev. Conserv. 2 (1993) 667-680
4. Corsi F., Duprè E., and Boitani L. A large-scale model f wolf distribution in Italy for conservation planning. Conserv. Biol. 13 (1999) 150-159
5. Drake, J.M., Bossenbroek, J.M. 2009. Profiling ecosystem vulnerability to invasion by zebra mussels with support vector machines. Theor. Ecol. 2, (in press) (DOI:10.1007/s12080-009-0050-8).
6. Drake J.M., Randin C., and Guisan A. Modelling ecological niches with support vector machines. J. Appl. Ecol. 43 (2006) 424-432
7. Duellman W.E., and Trueb L. Biology of Amphibians (1994), The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA 670 pp.
8. Elith J., and Burgman M.A. Predictions and their validation: rare plants in the Central Highlands, Victoria, Australia. In: Scott J.M., Heglund P.J., and Morrison M.L. (Eds). Predicting Species Occurrence: Issues of Accuracy and Scale (2002), Island Press, Washington, DC 303-314
9. Elith J., Graham C.H., Anderson R.P., Dudik M., Ferrier S., Guisan A., Hijmans R.J., Huettmann J.R., Lehmann A., Li J., Lucia G., Lohmann L.G., Loiselle B.A., Manion G., Moritz C., Nakamura M., Nakazawa Y., Overton J.McC., Peterson A.T., Phillips S.J., Richardson K.S., Scachetti-Pereira R., Schapire R.E., Soberón J., Williams S., Wisz M.S., and Zimmermann N.E. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29 (2006) 129-151
10. Emmons L., and Feer F. Neotropical Rainforest Mammals: A Field Guide (1997), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA 396 pp.
11. Farber O., and Kadmon R. Assessment of alternative approaches for bioclimatic modeling with special emphasis on the Mahalanobis distance. Ecol. Model. 160 (2003) 115-130
12. Ferrier S., Watson G., Pearce J., and Drielsma M. Extended statistical approaches to modelling spatial pattern in biodiversity in north-east New South Wales. I. Species-level modelling. Biodev. Conserv. 11 (2002) 2275-2307
13. Fielding A.H., and Bell J.F. A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ. Conserv. 24 (1997) 38-49
14. GAA. Global Amphibian Assessment (2008), Conservation International and NatureServe, Washington, DC. http://www.globalamphibians.org/ Available at http://www.globalamphibians.org
15. Guisan A., and Thuiller W. Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. Ecol. Lett. 8 (2005) 993-1009
16. Guo Q., Kelly M., and Graham C.H. One-class support vector machines for predicting distribution of sudden oak death in California. Ecol. Model. 182 (2005) 75-90
17. Hernandez P.A., Graham C.H., Master L.L., and Albert D.L. The effect of sample size and species characteristics on performance of different species distribution modeling methods. Ecography 29 (2006) 773-785
18. Hijmans R.J., Cameron S.E., Parra J.L., Jones P.G., and Jarvis A. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 25 (2005) 1965-1978
19. Hijmans R.J., Guarino L., and Rojas E. DIVA-GIS. A Geographic Information System for the Analysis of Biodiversity Data-Manual (2002), International Potato Center, Lima, Peru 73 pp.
20. Jeganathan P., Green R.E., Norris K., Vogiatzakis I.N., Bartsch A., Wotton R.S., Bowden C.G.R., Griffiths G.H., Pain D., and Rahmani A.R. Modelling habitat selection and distribution of the critically endangered Jerdon's courser Rhinoptilus bitorquatus in scrub jungle: an application of a new tracking method. J. Appl. Ecol. 41 (2004) 224-237
21. Kelly M., Guo Q., Liu D., and Shaari D. Modeling the risk of a new invasive forest disease in the United Sates: an evaluation of five environmental niche models. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 31 (2007) 689-710
22. Lewinsohn T.M., and Prado P.I. Biodiversidade Brasileira: Síntese do Estado Atual do Conhecimento (2002), Contexto, Brasília, Brasil 176 pp.
23. Lobo J.M., Jiménez-Valverde A., and Real R. AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 17 (2008) 145-151
24. Loiselle B.A., Howell C.A., Graham C.H., Goerck J.M., Brooks T., Smith K.G., and Williams P.H. Avoiding pitfalls of using species distribution models in conservation planning. Conserv. Biol. 17 (2003) 1591-1600
25. Magurran A.E. Measuring Biological Diversity (2004), Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK 256 pp.
26. Morellato L.P.C., and Haddad C.F.B. The Brazilian Atlantic Forest: an introduction. Biotropica 32 (2000) 786-792
27. Manel S., Williams H.C., and Ormerod S.J. Evaluating presence-absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence. J. Appl. Ecol. 38 (2001) 921-931
28. Myers N., Mittermeier R.A., Mittermeier C.G., Fonseca G.A.B., and Kent J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403 (2000) 853-858
29. Nix H.A. A biogeographic analysis of Australian Elapid snakes. In: Longmore R. (Ed). Atlas of Australian Elapid Snakes (1986), Australian Flora and Fauna Series, Canberra, Australia 4-15
30. Pearce J., and Ferrier S. Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression. Ecol. Model. 133 (2000) 225-245
31. Pearson R.G., Raxworthy C.J., Nakamura M., and Peterson A.T. Predicting species distributions from small numbers of occurrence records: a test case using cryptic geckos in Madagascar. J. Biogeogr. 34 (2007) 102-117
32. Phillips S.J., Anderson R.P., and Schapire R.E. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol. Model. 190 (2006) 231-259
33. Phillips S.J. Transferability, sample selection bias and background data in presence-only modelling: a response to Peterson et al. Ecography 31 (2008) 272-278
34. Phillips S.J., Dudík M., Elith J., Graham C.H., Lehman A., Leathwick J., and Ferrier S. Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecol. Appl. 19 (2009) 181-197
35. Peterson A.T., Papeş M., and Eaton M. Transferability and model evaluation in ecological niche modeling: a comparison of GARP and Maxent. Ecography 30 (2007) 550-560
36. Raxworthy C.J., Martinez-Meyer E., Horning N., Nussbaum R.A., Schneider G.E., Ortega-Huerta M.A., and Peterson A.T. Predicting distributions of known and unknown reptile species in Madagascar. Nature 426 (2003) 837-841
37. Segurado P., and Araujo M.B. An evaluation of methods for modelling species distributions. J. Biogeogr. 31 (2004) 1555-1568
38. Stockwell D., and Peters D. The GARP modelling system: problems and solutions to automated spatial prediction. Int. J. Geogr. Inform. Sci. 13 (1999) 143-158
39. Stockwell D., and Peterson A.T. Effects of sample size on accuracy of species distribution models. Ecol. Model. 148 (2002) 1-13
40. Sutton T., Giovanni R., and Siqueira M.F. Introducing openModeller. OSGeo J. 1 (2007) 1-6
41. Tsoar A., Allouche O., Steinitz O., Rotem D., and Kadmon R. A comparative evaluation of presence-only methods for modelling species distribution. Diver. Distrib. 13 (2007) 397-405
42. Turner W., Spector S., Gardiner N., Fladeland M., Sterling E., and Steininger M. Remote sensing for biodiversity science and conservation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18 (2003) 306-1314
43. Wiens J.A. Predicting species occurrences: progress, problems, and prospects. In: Scott J.M., Heglund P.J., Morrison M.L., Haufler J.B., Raphael M.G., Wall W.A., and Samson F.B. (Eds). Predicting Species Occurrences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale (2002), Island Press, Covelo, CA, USA 739-749
44. Young B.E. Endemic Species Distributions on the East Slope of the Andes in Peru and Bolivia (2007), NatureServe, Arlington, VA, USA 88 pp.
45. VanDerVal J., Shoo L.P., Graham C., and Williams S.E. Selecting pseudo-absence data for presence-only distribution modeling: How far should you stray from what you know?. Ecol. Model. 220 (2009) 589-594
46. Vapnik V. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory (1995), Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, USA 188 pp.