Cross-validation of species distribution models: Removing spatial sorting bias and calibration with a null model

Ecology

Volumn 93, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 679-688

  Hijmans, Robert J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

AUC; Bioclim; Cross validation; MaxEnt; Model evaluation; Niche model; Pairwise distance sampling; Spatial autocorrelation; Spatial sorting bias; Species distribution model.

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; AUTOCORRELATION; CALIBRATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA SET; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; NICHE; NUMERICAL MODEL; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; POPULATION MODELING; SPATIAL ANALYSIS;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CLIMATE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DEMOGRAPHY; ECOSYSTEM; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

ANIMALS; CLIMATE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DEMOGRAPHY; ECOSYSTEM; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84860258937     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/11-0826.1     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Araujo, M. B., and A. Guisan. 2006. Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling. Journal of Biogeography 33:1677-1688. (Pubitemid 44370084)
2. Araujo, M. B., R. G. Pearson, W. Thuiller, and M. Erhard. 2005. Validation of species-climate impact models under climate change. Global Change Biology 11:1504-1513. (Pubitemid 43898772)
3. Araujo, M. B., W. Thuiller, and N. G. Yoccoz. 2009. Reopening the climate envelope reveals macroscale associations with climate in European birds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106:E45-46.
4. Austin, M. P. 2002. Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between ecological theory and statistical modelling. Ecological Modelling 157:101-118. (Pubitemid 35255409)
5. Bahn, V., and B. J. McGill. 2007. Can niche-based distribution models outperform spatial interpolation? Global Ecology and Biogeography 16:733-742. (Pubitemid 47593556)
6. Bahn, V., R. J. O'Connor, and W. B. Krohn. 2006. Importance of spatial autocorrelation in modeling bird distributions at a continental scale. Ecography 29:835-844. (Pubitemid 46145585)
7. Beale, C. M., J. J. Lennon, and A. Gimona. 2008. Opening the climate envelope reveals no macroscale associations with climate in European birds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105:14908-14912.
8. Beale, C. M., J. J. Lennon, and A. Gimona. 2009. European bird distributions still show few climate associations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106:E41-E43.
9. Chapman, D. S. 2010. Weak climatic associations among British plant distributions. Global Ecology and Biogeogra-phy 19:831-841.
10. Chefaoui, R. M., and J. M. Lobo. 2008. Assessing the effects of pseudo-absences on predictive distribution model performance. Ecological Modelling 210:478-486. (Pubitemid 350299678)
11. Diggle, P. J., and T. F. Cox. 1983. Some distance-based tests of independence for sparsely-sampled multivariate spatial point patterns. International Statistical Review 51:11-23.
12. Dobrowski, S. Z., J. H. Thorne, J. A. Greenberg, H. D. Safford, A. R. Mynsberge, S. M. Crimmins, and A. K. Swanson. 2011. Modeling plant distributions over 75 years of measured climate change in California, USA: Relating temporal transferability to species traits. Ecological Monographs. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1890/10-1325.1
13. Dormann, C. F., et al. 2007. Methods to account for spatial autocorrelation in the analysis of species distributional data: a review. Ecography 30:609-628.
14. Elith, J., et al. 2006. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129-151.
15. Elith, J., and J. R. Leathwick. 2009. Species distribution models: ecological explanation and prediction across space and time. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 40:677-697.
16. Elith, J., S. J. Phillips, T. Hastie, M. Dudik, Y. E. Chee, and C. J. Yates. 2011. A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Diversity and Distributions 17:43-57.
17. Fielding, A. H., and J. F. Bell. 1997. A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environmental Conservation 24:38-49. (Pubitemid 27376840)
18. Gogol-Prokurat, M. 2011. Predicting habitat suitability for rare plants at local spatial scales using a species distribution model. Ecological Applications 21:33-47.
19. Graham, C. H., S. Ferrier, F. Huettman, C. Moritz, and A. T. Peterson. 2004. New developments in museum-based informatics and applications in biodiversity analysis. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19:497-503. (Pubitemid 39151670)
20. Hampe, A. 2004. Bioclimatic envelope models: what they detect and what they hide. Global Ecology and Biogeography 13:469-471.
21. Hawkins, B. A., J. A. F. Diniz-Filho, L. M. Bini, P. De Marco, and T. M. Blackburn. 2007. Red herrings revisited: spatial autocorrelation and parameter estimation in geographical ecology. Ecography 30:375-384. (Pubitemid 46889894)
22. Heikkinen, R. K., M. Luoto, M. B. Araujo, R. Virkkala, W. Thuiller, and M. T. Sykes. 2006. Methods and uncertainties in bioclimatic envelope modelling under climate change. Progress in Physical Geography 30:751-777. (Pubitemid 46090481)
23. Hijmans, R. J., S. E. Cameron, J. L. Parra, P. G. Jones, and A. Jarvis. 2005. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology 25:1965-1978. (Pubitemid 43013915)
24. Hijmans, R. J., K. A. Garrett, Z. Huaman, D. P. Zhang, M. Schreuder, and M. Bonierbale. 2000. Assessing the geographic representativeness of genebank collections: the case of Bolivian wild potatoes. Conservation Biology 14:1755-1765. (Pubitemid 32122363)
25. Hijmans, R. J., S. Phillips, J. Leathwick, and J. Elith. 2011. dismo: Species distribution modeling. R package version 0.6-3. http://cran.r-project. org/web/packages/dismo/
26. Jimenez-Valverde, A. 2011. Insights into the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) as a discrimination measure in species distribution modelling. Global Ecology and Biogeography. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1111/j. 1466-8238.2011.00683
27. Jimenez-Valverde, A., J. M. Lobo, and J. Hortal. 2008. Not as good as they seem: the importance of concepts in species distribution modelling. Diversity and Distributions 14:885-890.
28. Kearney, M., and W. Porter. 2009. Mechanistic niche modelling: combining physiological and spatial data to predict species' ranges. Ecology letters 12:334-350.
29. Koenig, W. D. 2002. Global patterns of environmental synchrony and the Moran effect. Ecography 25:283-288. (Pubitemid 34565003)
30. Liu, C., M. White, and G. Newell. 2011. Measuring and comparing the accuracy of species distribution models with presence-absence data. Ecography 34:232-243.
31. Lobo, J. M. 2008. More complex distribution models or more representative data? Biodiversity Informatics 5:14-19.
32. Lobo, J. M., A. Jimenez-Valverde, and J. Hortal. 2010. The uncertain nature of absences and their importance in species distribution modelling. Ecography 33:103-114.
33. Lobo, J. M., A. Jimenez-Valverde, and R. Real. 2007. AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models. Global Ecology and Biogeography 17:145-151.
34. Merckx, B., M. Steyaert, A. Vanreusel, M. Vincx, and J. Vanaverbeke. 2011. Null models reveal preferential sampling, spatial autocorrelation and overfitting in habitat suitability modelling. Ecological Modelling 222:588-597.
35. Monahan, W. B. 2009. A mechanistic niche model for measuring species' distributional responses to seasonal temperature gradients. PLoS ONE 4: e7921.
36. Nix, H. A. 1986. A biogeographic analysis of Australian elapid snakes. Pages 4-15 in R. Longmore, editor. Atlas of elapid snakes of Australia. Australian Flora and Fauna Series 7. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia.
37. Pearce, J., and S. Ferrier. 2000. Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression. Ecological Modelling 133:225-245.
38. Pearman, P. B., M. D'Amen, C. H. Graham, W. Thuiller, and N. E. Zimmermann. 2010. Within-taxon niche structure: niche conservatism, divergence and predicted effects of climate change. Ecography 33:990-100.
39. Pearson, R. G., C. J. Raxworthy, M. Nakamura, and A. T. Peterson. 2007. Predicting species distributions from small numbers of occurrence records: a test case using cryptic geckos in Madagascar. Journal of Biogeography 44:102-117. (Pubitemid 44952533)
40. Peterson, A. T., M. Papexs, and J. Soberon. 2008. Rethinking receiver operating characteristic analysis applications in ecological niche modeling. Ecological Modelling 213:63-72.
41. Phillips, S. J., R. P. Anderson, and R. E. Schapire. 2006. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecological Modelling 190:231-259. (Pubitemid 41680650)
42. R Development Core Team. 2010. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. www.R-project.org
43. Raes, N., and H. ter Steege. 2007. A null-model for significance testing of presence-only species distribution models. Ecog-raphy 30:727-736. (Pubitemid 350060570)
44. Schwartz, M. W., L. R. Iverson, A. M. Prasad, S. N. Matthews, and R. J. O'Connor. 2006. Predicting extinctions as a result of climate change. Ecology 87:1611-1615. (Pubitemid 44141540)
45. Segurado, P., M. B. Araujo, and W. E. Kunin. 2006. Consequences of spatial autocorrelation for niche-based models. Journal of Applied Ecology 43:433-444. (Pubitemid 43725548)
46. Thuiller, W. 2003. BIOMOD-optimizing predictions of species distributions and projecting potential future shifts under global change. Global Change Biology 9:1353-1362. (Pubitemid 37353908)
47. Vaughan, I. P., and S. J. Ormerod. 2003. Improving the quality of distribution models for conservation by addressing shortcomings in the field collection of training data. Conservation Biology 17:1601-1611. (Pubitemid 37538200)
48. Veloz, S. D. 2009. Spatially autocorrelated sampling falsely inflates measures of accuracy for presence-only niche models. Journal of Biogeography 36:2290-2299.
49. Warren, D., and S. S. Seifert. 2011. Environmental niche modeling in Maxent: the importance of model complexity and the performance of model selection criteria. Ecological Applications. http://dx.doi.org//10.1890/10-1171. 1
50. Zimmermann, N. E., T. C. Edwards, C. G. Graham, P. B. Pearman, and J.-C. Svenning. 2010. New trends in species distribution modelling. Ecography 33:985-989.