On evaluating species distribution models with random background sites in place of absences when test presences disproportionately sample suitable habitat

Diversity and Distributions

Volumn 19, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 867-872

  Smith, Adam B ^a  

^a MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN   (United States)

Author keywords

AUC; Background sites; Biased data; Model evaluation; Species distribution models

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; INVASIVE SPECIES; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; RARE SPECIES; SPECIES-AREA RELATIONSHIP;

EID: 84879153209     PISSN: 13669516     EISSN: 14724642     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ddi.12031     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Algar, A.C., Kharouba, H.M., Young, E.R. & Kerr, J.T. (2009) Predicting the future of species diversity: macroecological theory, climate change, and direct tests of alternative forecasting methods. Ecography, 32, 22-33.
2. Allouche, O., Tsoar, A. & Kadmon, R. (2006) Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic (TSS). Journal of Applied Ecology, 43, 1223-1232.
3. Bartel, R.A. & Sexton, J.O. (2009) Monitoring habitat dynamics for rare and endangered species using satellite images and niche-based models. Ecography, 32, 888-896.
4. Beaumont, L.J., Gallagher, R.V., Thuiller, W., Downey, P.O., Leishman, M.R. & Hughes, L. (2009) Different climate envelopes among invasive populations may lead to underestimations of current and future biological invasions. Diversity and Distributions, 15, 409-420.
5. Carroll, C., Dunk, J.R. & Moilanen, A. (2010) Optimizing resiliency of networks to climate change: multispecies conservation planning in the Pacific Northwest, USA. Global Change Biology, 16, 891-904.
6. Elith, J., Kearney, M. & Phillips, S. (2010) The art of modeling range-shifting species. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 1, 330-342.
7. Fielding, A.H. & Bell, J.F. (1997) A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environmental Conservation, 24, 38-49.
8. Gogol-Prokurat, M. (2011) Predicting habitat suitability for rare plants at local spatial scales using a species distribution model. Ecological Applications, 21, 33-47.
9. Guisan, A. & Zimmermann, N.E. (2000) Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecological Modeling, 135, 147-186.
10. Jiménez-Valverde, A. (2012) Insights into the area under the receiver (AUC) as a discrimination measure in species distribution modeling. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 21, 498-507.
11. Le Lay, G., Franc, E. & Guisan, A. (2010) Prospective sampling based on model ensembles improves the detection of rare species. Ecography, 33, 1015-1027.
12. Lobo, J.M., Jiménez-Valverde, A. & Real, R. (2007) AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 17, 145-151.
13. Loiselle, B.E., Jørgensen, P.M., Consiglio, T., Jiménez, Í., Blake, J.G., Lohmann, L.G. & Montiel, O.M. (2008) Predicting species distributions from herbarium collections: does climate bias in sampling influence model outcomes? Journal of Biogeography, 35, 105-116.
14. MacKenzie, D.I., Nichols, J.D., Royle, J.A., Pollock, K.H., Bailey, L.L. & Hines, J.E. (2006) Occupancy estimation and modeling: inferring patterns and dynamics of species occurrence. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
15. Marini, M.Â.., Barbet-Massin, M., Martinez, J., Prestes, N.P. & Jiguet, F. (2010) Applying ecological niche modeling to plan conservation actions for the red-spectacled Amazon (Amazona pretrei). Biological Conservation, 143, 102-112.
16. Mason, S.J. & Graham, N.E. (2002) Areas beneath the relative operating characteristics (ROC) and relative operating levels (ROL) curves: statistical significance and interpretation. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 128, 2145-2166.
17. Matthews, S.N., Iverson, L.R., Prasad, A.M. & Peters, M.P. (2011) Changes in potential habitat of 147 North American breeding bird species in response to redistribution of trees and climate following predicted climate change. Ecography, 34, 933-945.
18. Phillips, S.J., Anderson, R.P. & Schapire, R.E. (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecological Modeling, 190, 231-259.
19. Phillips, S.J., Dudík, M., Elith, J., Graham, C.H., Lehmann, A., Leathwick, J. & Ferrier, S. (2009) Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecological Applications, 19, 181-197.
20. Raes, N. & ter Steege, H. (2007) A null-model for significance testing of presence-only species distribution models. Ecography, 30, 727-736.
21. Richmond, O.M.W., MacEntee, J.P., Hijmans, R.J. & Brashares, J.S. (2010) Is the climate right for Pleistocene rewilding? Using species distribution models to extrapolate climatic suitability for mammals across continents. PLoS One, 5, e12899.
22. Schulman, L., Toivonen, T. & Ruokolainen, K. (2007) Analyzing botanical collecting effort in Amazonia and correcting for it in species range estimation. Journal of Biogeography, 34, 1388-1399.
23. Sheth, S.N., Lohmann, L.G., Distler, T. & Jiménez, I. (2012) Understanding bias in geographic range size estimates. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 21, 732-742.
24. Tuanmu, M.-N., Viña, A., Roloff, G.J., Liu, W., Ouyang, Z., Zhang, H. & Liu, J. (2011) Temporal transferability of wildlife habitat models: implications for monitoring. Journal of Biogeography, 38, 1510-1523.
25. Wiens, J.A., Stralberg, D., Jongsomjit, D., Howell, C.A. & Snyder, M.A. (2009) Niches, models, and climate change: assessing the assumptions and uncertainties. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 106, 19729-19736.
26. Wiley, E.O., McNyset, K.M., Peterson, A.T., Robins, C.R. & Stewart, A.M. (2003) Niche modeling and geographic range predictions in the marine environment using a machine-learning algorithm. Oceanography, 16, 120-127.