Choice of study area and predictors affect habitat suitability projections, but not the performance of species distribution models of stream biota

Ecological Modelling

Volumn 257, Issue , 2013, Pages 1-10

  Domisch, Sami ^a,b   Kuemmerlen, Mathias ^a,b   Jähnig, Sonja C ^a,b   Haase, Peter ^a,b  

^a BIODIVERSITY AND CLIMATE RESEARCH CENTRE BIK F   (Germany)

^b SENCKENBERG RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Germany)

Author keywords

Commission error; Landscape; Model accuracy; Pseudo absences; River; TSS

Indexed keywords

BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES; HABITAT SUITABILITY; LANDSCAPE; MODEL ACCURACY; MODELLING TECHNIQUES; PSEUDO-ABSENCES; SPECIES DISTRIBUTION MODELS; TSS;

DESIGN; ECOSYSTEMS; RIVERS;

POPULATION DISTRIBUTION;

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; ALGORITHM; BIOTA; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; HABITAT TYPE; LANDSCAPE; MACROINVERTEBRATE; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; PREDICTION; STREAM;

EID: 84875610884     PISSN: 03043800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.02.019     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Adriaenssens V., Goethals P.L., Charles J., de Pauw N. Application of Bayesian Belief Networks for the prediction of macroinvertebrate taxa in rivers. Annales de Limnologie-International Journal of Limnology 2004, 40:181-191.
2. Allan J.D. Landscapes and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 2004, 35:257-284.
3. Allouche O., Tsoar A., Kadmon R. Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic TSS. Journal of Applied Ecology 2006, 43:1223-1232.
4. Anderson R.P., Lew D., Peterson A.T. Evaluating predictive models of species' distributions: criteria for selecting optimal models. Ecological Modelling 2003, 162:211-232.
5. Araújo M.B., Alagador D., Cabeza M., Nogues-Bravo D., Thuiller W. Climate change threatens European conservation areas. Ecology Letters 2011, 14:484-492.
6. Araújo M.B., New M. Ensemble forecasting of species distributions. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2007, 22:42-47.
7. Araújo M.B., Thuiller W., Yoccoz N.G. Reopening the climate envelope reveals macroscale associations with climate in European birds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2009, 106:E45.
8. Araújo M.B., Pearson R.G., Thuiller W., Erhard M. Validation of species-climate impact models under climate change. Global Change Biology 2005, 11:1504-1513.
9. Bálint M., Domisch S., Engelhardt C.H., Haase P., Lehrian S., Sauer J., Theissinger K., Pauls S.U., Nowak C. Cryptic biodiversity loss linked to global climate change. Nature Climate Change 2011, 1:313-318.
10. Barbet-Massin M., Jiguet F., Albert C.H., Thuiller W. Selecting pseudo-absences for species distribution models: how, where and how many?. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 2012, 2:327-338.
11. Beven K., Kirkby M. A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrological Sciences Bulletin 1979, 24:46-69.
12. Brooks A.J., Haeusler T.I., Reinfelds I., Williams S. Hydraulic microhabitats and the distribution of macroinvertebrate assemblages in riffles. Freshwater Biology 2005, 50:331-344.
13. Burgman M.A., Fox J.C. Bias in species range estimates from minimum convex polygons: implications for conservation and options for improved planning. Animal Conservation 2003, 6:19-28.
14. Clausen B., Biggs B.J. Relationships between benthic biota and hydrological indices in New Zealand streams. Freshwater Biology 1997, 38:327-342.
15. Cordellier M., Pfenninger M. Climate-driven range dynamics of the freshwater limpet, Ancylus fluviatilis, Pulmonata, Basommatophora. Journal of Biogeography 2008, 35:1580-1592.
16. Dauwalter D.C., Rahel F.J. Distribution modelling to guide stream fish conservation: an example using the mountain sucker in the Black Hills National Forest, USA. Aquatic Conservation - Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 2008, 18:1263-1276.
17. Dominguez-Dominguez O., Martinez-Meyer E., Zambrano L., de Leon G.P.P. Using ecological-niche modeling as a conservation tool for freshwater species: live-bearing fishes in central Mexico. Conservation Biology 2006, 20:1730-1739.
18. Domisch S., Jähnig S.C., Haase P. Climate-change winners and losers: stream macroinvertebrates of a submontane region in Central Europe. Freshwater Biology 2011, 56:2009-2020.
19. Domisch S., Araújo M.B., Bonada N., Pauls S.U., Jähnig S.C., Haase P. Modelling distribution in European stream macroinvertebrates under future climates. Global Change Biology 2013, 19:752-762.
20. European Environment Agency (EEA) The European Topic Centre on Land Use and Spatial Information. Corine Land Cover 2006 Raster Data - Version 15 (08/2011) 2011, Available at:. http://www.eea.europa.eu/.
21. Elith J., Leathwick J.R. Species distribution models: ecological explanation and prediction across space and time. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 2009, 40:677-697.
22. Effenberger M., Sailer G., Townsend C.R., Matthaei C.D. Local disturbance history and habitat parameters influence the microdistribution of stream invertebrates. Freshwater Biology 2006, 51:312-332.
23. Engler R., Randin C.F., Thuiller W., Dullinger S., Zimmermann N.E., Araújo M.B., Pearman P.B., Le Lay G., Piedallu C., Albert C.H., Choler P., Coldea G., de Lamo X., Dirnbock T., Gegout J.C., Gomez-Garcia D., Grytnes J.A., Heegaard E., Hoistad F., Nogues-Bravo D., Normand S., Puscas M., Sebastià M.T., Stanisci A., Theurillat J.P., Trivedi, Vittoz P., Guisan A. 21st century climate change threatens mountain flora unequally across Europe. Global Change Biology 2011, 17:2330-2341.
24. Frissell C.A., Liss W.J., Warren C.E., Hurley M.D. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification - viewing streams in a watershed context. Environmental Management 1986, 10:199-214.
25. Green R. Sampling Design and Statistical Methods for Environmental Biologists 1979, Wiley, New York.
26. Haase P., Lohse S., Pauls S.U., Schindehutte K., Sundermann A., Rolauffs P., Hering D. Assessing streams in Germany with benthic invertebrates: development of a practical standardised protocol for macro invertebrate sampling and sorting. Limnologica 2004, 34:349-365.
27. Haase P., Murray-Bligh J., Lohse S., Pauls S.U., Sundermann A., Gunn R., Clarke R. Assessing the impact of errors in sorting and identifying macroinvertebrate samples. Hydrobiologia 2006, 566:505-521.
28. Halvorsen R. A gradient analytic perspective on distribution modelling. Sommerfeltia 2012, 35:1-164.
29. Hopkins R.L. Use of landscape pattern metrics and multiscale data in aquatic species distribution models: a case study of a freshwater mussel. Landscape Ecology 2009, 24:943-955.
30. Jimenez-Valverde A., Lobo J.M. Threshold criteria for conversion of probability of species presence to either-or presence-absence. Acta Oecologica-International Journal of Ecology 2007, 31:361-369.
31. Jähnig S., Kuemmerlen M., Kiesel J., Domisch S., Cai Q., Schmalz B., Fohrer N. Modelling of riverine ecosystems by integrating models: conceptual approach, a case study and research agenda. Journal of Biogeography 2012, 39:2253-2263.
32. Kuemmerlen M., Domisch S., Schmalz B., Cai Q., Fohrer N., Jähnig S.C. Integrated modelling of aquatic ecosystems in China: distribution of benthic macroinvertebrates at catchment scale. Hydrologie und Wasserbewirtschaftung 2012, 56:185-192.
33. LAWA Final Report of the Project Finalisation of the River Typology for WFD Purposes in German 2003, Available at. http://www.fliessgewaesserbewertung.de/en/download/typologie.
34. Labay B., Cohen A.E., Sissel B., Hendrickson D.A., Martin F.D., Sarkar S., Browman H. Assessing historical fish community composition using surveys, historical collection data, and species distribution models. PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e25145.
35. Lancaster J., Hildrew A.G. Characterizing in-stream flow refugia. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 1993, 50:1663-1675.
36. Liu C.R., Berry P.M., Dawson T.P., Pearson R.G. Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distributions. Ecography 2005, 28:385-393.
37. Lobo J.M., Tognelli M.F. Exploring the effects of quantity and location of pseudo-absences and sampling biases on the performance of distribution models with limited point occurrence data. Journal for Nature Conservation 2011, 19:1-7.
38. Lobo J.M., Jimenez-Valverde A., Hortal J. The uncertain nature of absences and their importance in species distribution modelling. Ecography 2010, 33:103-114.
39. Lobo J.M., Jimenez-Valverde A., Real R. AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models. Global Ecology and Biogeography 2008, 17:145-151.
40. Loo S.E., Mac Nally R., Lake P.S. Forecasting New Zealand mudsnail invasion range: model comparisons using native and invaded ranges. Ecological Applications 2007, 17:181-189.
41. Lyons J., Stewart J.S., Mitro M. Predicted effects of climate warming on the distribution of 50 stream fishes in Wisconsin, U.S.A. Journal of Fish Biology 2010, 77:1867-1898.
42. McNyset K.M. Use of ecological niche modelling to predict distributions of freshwater fish species in Kansas. Ecology of Freshwater Fish 2005, 14:243-255.
43. McKenna J.E., Johnson J.H. Landscape models of brook trout abundance and distribution in lotic habitat with field validation. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 2011, 31:742-756.
44. Maidment D.R. Arc Hydro. GIS for Water Resources 2005, Redlands, CA, ESRI Press.
45. Malmqvist B. Aquatic invertebrates in riverine landscapes. Freshwater Biology 2002, 47:679-694.
46. Marmion M., Parviainen M., Luoto M., Heikkinen R.K., Thuiller W. Evaluation of consensus methods in predictive species distribution modelling. Diversity and Distributions 2009, 15:59-69.
47. Mouton A.M., de Baets B., Goethals P.L. Ecological relevance of performance criteria for species distribution models. Ecological Modelling 2010, 221:1995-2002.
48. Müller-Westermeier, G., 1995. Numerisches Verfahren zu Erstellung klimatologischer Karten. Berichte des Deutschen Wetterdienstes, Vol. 193. Selbstverl. des Deutschen Wetterdienstes, Offenbach am Main.
49. Mynsberge A.R., Strager M.P., Strager J.M., Mazik P.M. Developing predictive models for freshwater mussels (Mollusca: Unionidae) in the Appalachians: limitations and directions for future research. Ecoscience 2009, 16:387-398.
50. Newton T.J., Woolnough D.A., Strayer D.L. Using landscape ecology to understand and manage freshwater mussel populations. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 2008, 27:424-439.
51. Noss R.F. Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. Conservation Biology 1990, 4:355-364.
52. Oreskes N., Schrader-Frechette K., Belitz K. Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models in the earth sciences. Science 1994, 263:641-646.
53. Pearson R.G., Dawson T.P. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful?. Global Ecology and Biogeography 2003, 12:361-371.
54. Poff N.L. Landscape filters and species traits: towards mechanistic understanding and prediction in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 1997, 16:391-409.
55. Pottgiesser T., Sommerhäuser M. Biocoenotically Relevant Stream Types for Germany 2004, Available at. http://www.fliessgewaesserbewertung.de/en.
56. R Development Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing 2012, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.r-project.org/.
57. Sauer J., Domisch S., Nowak C., Haase P. Low mountain ranges: summit traps for montane freshwater species under climate change. Biodiversity and Conservation 2011, 20:3133-3146.
58. Shah R.D.T., Narayan Shah D., Domisch S. Range shifts of a relict Himalayan dragonfly in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region under climate change scenarios. International Journal of Odonatology 2012, 15:209-222.
59. Simaika J.P., Samways M.J., Kipping J., Suhling F., Dijkstra K.B., Clausnitzer V., Boudot J., Domisch S. Continental-scale conservation prioritization of African dragonflies. Biological Conservation 2013, 157:245-254.
60. Sowa, S.P., Diamond, D.D., Abbitt, R., Annis, G.M., Gordon, T., Morey, M.E., Sorensen, G.R., True, D., 2005. A GAP analysis for riverine ecosystems of Missouri. Final Report, submitted to the USGS National Gap Analysis Program. 1675 pp.
61. Statzner B., Gore J.A., Resh V.H. Hydraulic stream ecology: observed patterns and potential applications. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 1988, 7:307-360.
62. Steen P.J., Zorn T.G., Seelbach P.W., Schaeffer J.S. Classification tree models for predicting distributions of Michigan stream fish from landscape variables. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 2008, 137:976-996.
63. Stockwell D.R.B., Peterson A.T. Effects of sample size on accuracy of species distribution models. Ecological Modelling 2002, 148:1-13.
64. Stokland J.N., Halvorsen R., Støa B. Species distribution modelling-effect of design and sample size of pseudo-absence observations. Ecological Modelling 2011, 222:1800-1809.
65. Strahler A. Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 1957, 38:913-920.
66. Strayer D.L., Beighley R.E., Thompson L.C., Brooks S., Nilsson C., Pinay G., Naiman R.J. Effects of land cover on stream ecosystems: roles of empirical models and scaling issues. Ecosystems 2003, 6:407-423.
67. Thuiller W., Brotons L., Araújo M.B., Lavorel S. Effects of restricting environmental range of data to project current and future species distributions. Ecography 2004, 27:165-172.
68. Thuiller W., Lafourcade B., Engler R., Araújo M.B. BIOMOD - a platform for ensemble forecasting of species distributions. Ecography 2009, 32:369-373.
69. U.S.Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center HYDRO1k Elevation Derivative Database 2010, LP DAAC, Sioux Falls, SD, Available at:. http://eros.usgs.gov/.
70. VanDerWal J., Shoo L.P., Graham C., William S.E. Selecting pseudo-absence data for presence-only distribution modeling: how far should you stray from what you know?. Ecological Modelling 2009, 220:589-594.
71. Wang L., Seelbach P.W., Hughes R.M. Introduction to landscape influences on stream habitats and biological assemblages. American Fisheries Society Symposium 2006, 48:1-23.
72. Wasson J., Chandesris A., Garcia-Bautista A., Pella H., Villeneuve B. Relationships Between Ecological and Chemical Status of Surface Waters 2007, European Hydro-Ecoregions, Cemagref, Lyon.
73. Wiley M.J., Hyndman D.W., Pijanowski B.C., Kendall A.D., Riseng C., Rutherford E.S., Cheng S.T., Carlson M.L., Tyler J.A., Stevenson R.J., Steen P.J., Richards P.L., Seelbach P.W., Koches J.M., Rediske R.R. A multi-modeling approach to evaluating climate and land use change impacts in a Great Lakes River Basin. Hydrobiologia 2010, 657:243-262.
74. Wilson C.D., Roberts D., Reid N. Applying species distribution modelling to identify areas of high conservation value for endangered species: a case study using Margaritifera margaritifera (L.). Biological Conservation 2011, 144:821-829.