Harnessing the world's biodiversity data: Promise and peril in ecological niche modeling of species distributions

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Volumn 1260, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 66-80

  Anderson, Robert P ^a,b,c,d  

^a CITY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^c CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^d DIVISION OF INVERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Climate change; Ecological niche modeling; Georeference; Natural history museum; Species distribution

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; CLIMATE; CONSERVATION BIOLOGY; ECOLOGICAL NICHE; GEOGRAPHY; SAMPLING ERROR; SPECIES DISTRIBUTION; TAXONOMY; ZOONOSIS;

EID: 84864054002     PISSN: 00778923     EISSN: 17496632     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06440.x     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Funk, V.A. & K.S. Richardson. 2002. Systematic data in biodiversity studies: use it or lose it. Syst. Biol. 51: 303-316.
2. Wilson, E.O. 2003. The encyclopedia of life. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18: 77-80.
3. Soberón, J. & A.T. Peterson. 2004. Biodiversity informatics: managing and applying primary biodiversity data. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. 359: 689-698.
4. Boakes, E.H., P.J.K. McGowan, R.A. Fuller, et al. 2010. Distorted views of biodiversity: spatial and temporal bias in species occurrence data. PLOS Biology. 8: 1-11.
5. Newbold, T. 2010. Applications and limitations of museum data for conservation and ecology, with particular attention to species distribution models. Progr. Phys. Geogr. 34: 3-22.
6. Jiménez-Valverde, A., A.T. Peterson, J. Soberón, et al. 2011. Use of niche models in invasive species risk assessments. Biol. Invasions. 13: 2785-2797.
7. Peterson, A.T., J. Soberón, R.G. Pearson, et al. 2011. Ecological Niches and Geographic Distributions. Monographs in Population Biology 49, Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ.
8. Zimmermann, N.E., T.C. Edwards, Jr., C.H. Graham, et al. 2010. New trends in species distribution modelling. Ecography 33: 985-989.
9. Elith, J., C.H. Graham, R.P. Anderson, et al. 2006. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29: 129-151.
10. Kozak, K.H., C.H. Graham & J.J. Wiens. 2008. Integrating GIS-based environmental data into evolutionary biology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23: 141-148.
11. Swenson, N.G. 2008. The past and future influence of geographic information systems on hybrid zone, phylogeographic and speciation research. J. Evol. Biol. 21: 421-434.
12. Thomas, C.D., A. Cameron, R.E. Green, et al. 2004. Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427: 145-148.
13. Elith, J. & J.R. Leathwick. 2009. Species distribution models: ecological explanation and prediction across space and time. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 440: 677-697.
14. Chase, J.M. & M.A. Leibold. 2003. Ecological Niches: Linking Classical and Contemporary Approaches. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
15. Holt, R.D. 2009. Bringing the Hutchinsonian niche into the 21st Century: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106: 19659-19665.
16. Soberón, J.M. 2010. Niche and area of distribution modeling: a population ecology perspective. Ecography 33: 159-167.
17. Anderson, R.P. & A. Raza. 2010. The effect of the extent of the study region on GIS models of species geographic distributions and estimates of niche evolution: preliminary tests with montane rodents (genus Nephelomys) in Venezuela. J. Biogeogr. 37: 1378-1393.
18. Gaston, K.J. 2003. The Structure and Dynamics of Geographic Ranges. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
19. Anderson, R.P., A.T. Peterson & M. Gómez-Laverde. 2002. Using niche-based GIS modeling to test geographic predictions of competitive exclusion and competitive release in South American pocket mice. Oikos 98: 3-16.
20. Anderson, R.P., M. Gómez-Laverde & A.T. Peterson. 2002. Geographical distributions of spiny pocket mice in South America: insights from predictive models. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 11: 131-141.
21. Thomson, MC., V. Obsomer, M. Dunne, et al. 2000. Satellite mapping of loa loa prevalence in relation to ivermectin use in west and central Africa. Lancet 356: 1077-1078.
22. Gyapong, J.O., D. Kyelem, I. Kleinschmidt, et al. 2002. The use of spatial analysis in mapping the distribution of bancroftian filariasis in four West African countries. Annals. Trop. Med. Paras. 96: 695-705.
23. Stein, B.R., & J. Wieczorek. 2004. Mammals of the world: MaNIS as an example of data integration in a distributed network environment. Biodiv. Informatics 1: 14-22.
24. Ariño, A.H. 2010. Approaches to estimating the universe of natural history collections data. Biodiv. Informatics. 7: 81-92.
25. Araújo, M.B. & A. Guisan. 2006. Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling. J. Biogeogr. 33: 1677-1688.
26. Bradley, B.A. & E. Fleishman. 2008. Can remote sensing of land cover improve species distribution modeling? J. Biogeogr. 35: 1158-1159.
27. Austin, M.P. & K.P. Van Neil. 2010. Improving species distribution models for climate change studies: variable selection and scale. J. Biogeogr. 38: 1-8.
28. Graham, C.H., S. Ferrier, F. Huettman, et al. 2004. New developments in museum-based informatics and application in biodiversity analysis. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19: 497-503.
29. Whittaker, R.J., M.B. Araújo, P. Jepson, et al. 2005. Conservation biogeography: assessment and prospect. Diversity Distrib. 11: 3-23.
30. Anderson, R.P. 1999 [2000]. Preliminary review of the systematics and biogeography of the spiny pocket mice (Heteromys) of Colombia. Rev. Acad. Colomb. Cienc. Exactas Físicas Nat. 23(suplemento especial): 613-630.
31. Anderson, R.P. & P. Jarrín-V. 2002. A new species of spiny pocket mouse (Heteromyidae: Heteromys) endemic to western Ecuador. Amer. Mus. Novitates 3382: 1-26.
32. Anderson, R.P. 2003. Taxonomy, distribution, and natural history of the genus Heteromys (Rodentia: Heteromyidae) in western Venezuela, with the description of a dwarf species from the Península de Paraguaná. Amer. Mus. Novitates 3396: 1-43.
33. Anderson, R.P. & E.E. Gutiérrez. 2009. Taxonomy, distribution, and natural history of the genus Heteromys (Rodentia: Heteromyidae) in central and eastern Venezuela, with the description of a new species from the Cordillera de la Costa. Systematic Mammalogy: Contributions in Honor of Guy G. Musser (ed. by R.S. Voss and M.D. Carleton). Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 331: 33-93.
34. Raven, P.H. & E.O. Wilson. 1992. A fifty-year plan for biodiversity surveys. Science 258: 1099-1100.
35. Feeley, K.H. & M.R. Silman. 2010. Modelling the responses of Andean and Amazonian plant species to climate change: the effects of georeferencing errors and the importance of data filtering. J. Biogeogr. 37: 733-740.
36. Guralnick, R.P., J. Wieczorek, R. Beaman, et al. 2006. BioGeomancer: automated georeferencing to map the world's biodiversity data. PLoS Biol. 4: 1901-1909.
37. García-Milagros, E. & V.A. Funk. 2010. Improving the use of information from museum specimens: using Google Earth© to georeference Guiana Shield specimens in the US National Herbarium. Front. Biogeogr. 2: 71-77.
38. Hijmans, R.J., S.E. Cameron, J.L. Parra, et al. 2005. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 25: 1965-1978.
39. Samper, C. 2004. Taxonomy and environmental policy. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. 359: 721-728.
40. Reddy, S. & L.M. Dávalos. 2003. Geographical sampling bias and its implications for conservation priorities in Africa. J. Biogeogr. 30: 1719-1727.
41. Kadmon, R., O. Farber & A. Danin. 2004. Effect of roadside bias on the accuracy of predictive maps produced by bioclimatic models. Ecol. Appl. 14: 401-413.
42. Anderson, R.P. 2003. Real vs. artefactual absences in species distributions: tests for Oryzomys albigularis (Rodentia: Muridae) in Venezuela. J. Biogeogr. 30: 591-605.
43. Phillips, S.J., M. Dudík, J. Elith, et al. 2009. Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecol. Appl. 19: 181-197.
44. Barve, N., V. Barve, A. Jiménez-Valverde, et al. 2011. The crucial role of the accessible area in ecological niche modeling and species distribution modeling. Ecol. Model. 222: 1810-1819.
45. Williams, J.W., S.T. Jackson & J.E. Kutzbach. 2007. Projected distributions of novel and disappearing climates by 2100 AD. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104: 5738-5742.
46. Williams, J.W. & S.T. Jackson. 2007. Novel climates, no-analog communities, and ecological surprises. Front. Ecol. Environ. 5: 475-482.
47. Elith, J., S.J. Phillips, T. Hastie, et al. 2011. A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Diversity Distrib. 17: 43-57.
48. Anderson, R.P., D. Lew & A.T. Peterson. 2003. Evaluating predictive models of species' distributions: criteria for selecting optimal models. Ecol. Model. 162: 211-232.
49. Veloz, S.D. 2009. Spatially autocorrelated sampling falsely inflates measures of accuracy for presence-only niche models. J. Biogeogr. 36: 2290-2299.
50. Phillips, S.J., R.P. Anderson & R.E. Schapire. 2006. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol. Model. 190: 231-259.
51. Elith, J., M. Kearney & S. Phillips. 2010. The art of modelling range-shifting species. Meth. Ecol. Evol. 1: 330-342.
52. Anderson, R.P. & I. Gonzalez, Jr. 2011. Species-specific tuning increases robustness to sampling bias in models of species distributions: an implementation with Maxent. Ecol. Model. 222: 2796-2811.
53. Warren, D.L. & S.N. Seifert. 2011. Ecological niche modeling in Maxent: the importance of model complexity and the performance of model selection criteria. Ecol. Appl. 21: 335-342.
54. Araújo, M.B. & C. Rahbek. 2006. How does climate change affect biodiversity? Science 313: 1396-1397.