Habitat suitability modelling of rare species using Bayesian networks: Model evaluation under limited data

Ecological Modelling

Volumn 299, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 64-78

  Hamilton, Serena H ^a,b   Pollino, Carmel A ^c   Jakeman, Anthony J ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c CSIRO   (Australia)

Author keywords

Bayesian belief networks; Ecological modeling; Endangered species; Model validation; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION; ECOSYSTEMS; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ECOLOGICAL MODELING; ENDANGERED SPECIES; GEOMORPHIC CONDITIONS; HABITAT SUITABILITY; HABITAT SUITABILITY MODEL; MODEL VALIDATION; PREDICTIVE UNCERTAINTY; UNCERTAINTY;

BAYESIAN NETWORKS;

ASSESSMENT METHOD; BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; CRAYFISH; DATA SET; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; FRESHWATER ENVIRONMENT; GEOMORPHOLOGY; HABITAT TYPE; RARE SPECIES; RIPARIAN VEGETATION; SPECIES OCCURRENCE; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ASTACOIDEA; ASTACOPSIS GOULDI;

EID: 84930618390     PISSN: 03043800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.12.004     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. ACERA Elicitation tool: process manual 2010, Australian Centre of Excellence for Risk Analysis.
2. Aguilera P.A., Fernández R., Fernández A., Rumi R., Salmerón A. Bayesian networks in environmental modelling. Environ. Model. Softw. 2011, 26(12):1376-1388.
3. Barry S., Elith J. Error and uncertainty in habitat models. J. Appl. Ecol. 2006, 43(3):413-423.
4. Bennett N.D., Croke B.F.W., Guariso G., Guillaume J.H.A., Hamilton S.H., Jakeman A.J., Marsili-Libelli S., Newham L.T.H., Norton J.P., Perrin C., Pierce S.A., Robson B., Seppelt R., Voinov A.A., Fath B.D., Andreassian V. Characterising performance of environmental models. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 40:1-20.
5. Beven K.J., Freer J. Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology. J. Hydrol. 2001, 249(1-4):11-29.
6. Bobbi C. An investigation of the habitat use of juvenile Astacopsis gouldi in the Emu River, Tasmania 2006, Water Assessment Branch, Department of Primary Industries and Water.
7. Borsuk M.E., Reichert P., Peter A., Schager E., Burkhardt-Holm P. Assessing the decline of brown trout (Salmo trutta) in Swiss rivers using a Bayesian probability network. Ecol. Model. 2006, 192(102):224-244.
8. Borsuk M.E., Stow C.A., Reckhow K.H. A Bayesian network of eutrophication models for synthesis, prediction, and uncertainty analysis. Ecol. Model. 2004, 173:219-239.
9. Castelletti A., Soncini-Sessa R. Bayesian networks and participatory modelling in water resouce management. Environ. Model. Softw. 2007, 22:1075-1088.
10. Catenacci M., Giupponi C. Integrated assessment of sea-level rise adaptation strategies using a Bayesian decision network. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 44:87-100.
11. Chen S.H., Pollino C.A. Good practice in Bayesian network modelling. Environ. Model. Softw. 2012, 37:134-145.
12. Cianfrani C., Le Lay G., Hirzel A.H., Loy A. Do habitat suitability models reliably predict the recovery areas of threatened species?. J. Appl. Ecol. 2010, 47(2):421-430.
13. Crout N., Kokkonen T., Jakeman A.J., Norton J.P., Newham L.T.H., Anderson R., Assaf H., Croke B.F.W., Gaber N., Gibbons J., Holzworth D., Mysiak J., Reichl J., Seppelt R., Wagener T., Whitfield P. Good modelling practice. Developments in Integrated Environmental Assessment 2009, vol. 3:15-31. Elsevier, Amsterdam. A.J. Jakeman, A.A. Voinov, A.E. Rizzoli, S.H. Chen (Eds.).
14. Davies P.E., Cook L.S.J., Munks S.A., Meggs J. Astacopsis gouldi Clark: habitat characteristics and relative abundance of juveniles. Tasforests 2005, 16.
15. Davies P.E., Cook L.S.J., Sloane T. Defining headwater stream habitat suitability for juvenile Astacopsis gouldi Interim report 2005, Report to the Forest Practices Board. Freshwater Systems Aquatic Environmental Consulting Service.
16. Davies P.E., Munks S.A., Cook L.S.J., Von Minden P., Wilson D. Mapping suitability of habitat for the giant freshwater crayfish, Astacopsis Gouldi: background document to GIS mapping layer 2007, 4. Forest Practices Authority Scientific Report.
17. Deletic A., Dotto C.B.S., McCarthy D.T., Kleidorfer M., Freni G., Mannina G., Uhl M., Henrichs M., Fletcher T.D., Rauch W., Bertrand-Krajewski J.L., Tait S. Assessing uncertainties in urban drainage models. Phys. Chem. Earth A/B/C 2012, 42-44:3-10.
18. DePinto J.V., Freedman P.L., Dilks D.M., Larson W.M. Models quantify the total maximum daily load process. J. Environ. Eng. 2004, 130(6):703-713.
19. Drescher M., Perera A.H., Johnson C.J., Buse L.J., Drew C.A., Burgman M.A. Toward rigorous use of expert knowledge in ecological research. Ecosphere 2013, 4(7):83.
20. DPIW Conservation of Freshwater Ecosystem Values (CFEV) project Technical Report. Conservation of Freshwater Ecosystem Values Program 2008, Department of Primary Industries and Water, Available from http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/water/water-monitoring-and-assessment/cfev-program/cfev-resources (accessed November 2014).
21. Engler R., Guisan A., Rechsteiner L. An improved approach for predicting the distribution of rare and endangered species from occurrence and pseudo-absence data. J. Appl. Ecol. 2004, 41(2):263-274.
22. Friedman N. Learning belief networks in the presence of missing values and hidden variables. Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) 1997, 125-133.
23. Gibson L., Barrett B., Burbidge A. Dealing with uncertain absences in habitat modelling: a case study of a rare ground-dwelling parrot. Divers. Distrib. 2007, 13(6):704-713.
24. Growns I. Astacopsis gouldi Clark in streams of the God Range, northing Tasmania: the effects of catchment disturbance. Pap. Proc. R. Soc. Tasmania 1995, 129:1-6.
25. Guisan A., Broennimann O., Engler R., Vust M., Yoccoz N.G., Lehmann A., Zimmermann N.E. Using niche-based models to improve the sampling of rare species. Conserv. Biol. 2005, 20:501-511.
26. Guisan A., Thuiller W. Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. Ecol. Lett. 2005, 8:993-1009.
27. Guisan A., Zimmermann N.E. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol. Model. 2000, 135:147-186.
28. Hamr P. A Giant's Tale: the life history of Astacopsis gouldi (Decapoda: Parastacidae) a freshwater crayfish from Tasmania. Freshw. Crayfish 1996, 11:13-33.
29. Holland E.P., Burrow J.F., Dytham C., Aegerter J.N. Modelling with uncertainty: introducing a probabilistic framework to predict animal population dynamics. Ecol. Model. 2009, 220:1203-1217.
30. Horwitz P. Distribution and conservation status of the Tasmanian giant freshwater lobster Astacopsis gouldi (Decapoda: Parastacidae). Biol. Conserv. 1994, 69:199-206.
31. Jakeman A.J., Hornberger G.M. How much complexity is warranted in a rainfall-runoff model?. Water Resour. Res. 1993, 29(8):2637-2649.
32. Jakeman A.J., Post D.A., Beck M.B. From data and theory to environmental model: the case of rainfall runoff. Environmetrics 2006, 5(3):297-314.
33. Jakeman A.J., Letcher R.A., Norton J.P. Ten iterative steps in development and evaluation of environmental models. Environ. Model. Softw. 2006, 21(5):602-614.
34. Kelly R.A., Jakeman A.J., Barreteau O., Borsuk M.E., ElSawah S., Hamilton S.H., Henriksen H.J., Kuikka S.S., Maier H.R., Rizzoli A.E., van Delden H., Voinov A.A. Selecting among five common modelling approaches for integrated environmental assessment and management. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 47:159-181.
35. Kjærulff U. dHugin: a computational system for dynamic time-sliced Bayesian networks. Int. J. Forecast. 1995, 11:89-111.
36. Knol A.B., Slottje P., van der Sluijs J.P., Lebret E. The use of expert elicitation in environmental health impact assessment: a seven step procedure. Environ. Health 2010, 9:19.
37. Krueger T., Page T., Hubacek K., Smith L., Hiscock K. The role of expert opinion in environmental modelling. Environ. Model. Softw. 2012, 36:4-18.
38. Landis J.R., Koch G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33(1):159-174.
39. Landuyt D., Broekx S., D'hondt R., Engelen G., Aertsens J., Goethals P.L.M. A review of Bayesian belief networks in ecosystem service modelling. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 46:1-11.
40. Laurent E.J., Drew C.A., Thogmartin W.E. The role of assumptions in predictions of habitat availability and quality. Predictive Species and Habitat Modelling in Landscape Ecology: Concepts and Applications 2011, 71-90. Springer, New York. C.A. Drew, Y.F. Wiersma, F. Huettmann (Eds.).
41. Levins R. The strategy of model building in population biology. Am. Sci. 1966, 54:421-431.
42. Li D., Yang H.Z., Liang X.F. Prediction analysis of a wastewater treatment system using a Bayesian network. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 40:140-150.
43. Lindenmayer D.B., Clark T.W., Lacy R.C., Thomas V.C. Population viability analysis as a tool in wildlife conservation policy: with reference to Australia. Environ. Manage. 1993, 17:745-758.
44. Lyall J. Biotic and abiotic factors affecting populations of Astacopsis gouldi in Northwest Tasmania 2000, University of Tasmania, School of Applied Science, Honours.
45. Manel S., Williams H.C., Ormerod S.J. Evaluating presence-absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence. J. Appl. Ecol. 2001, 38:921-931.
46. Marcot B.G., Steventon J.D., Sutherland G.D., McCann R.K. Guidelines for developing and updating Bayesian belief networks applied to ecological modeling and conservation. Can. J. For. Res. 2006, 36(12):3063-3074.
47. Morgan M.G., Henrion M. Uncertainty. A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis 1990, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
48. Morris W.F., Bloch P.L., Hudgens B.R., Moyle L.C., Stinchcombe J.R. Population viability analysis in endangered species recovery plans: past use and future improvements. Ecol. Appl. 2002, 12:708-712.
49. Mouton A.M., De Baets B., Goethals P.L.M. Knowledge-based versus data-driven fuzzy habitat suitability models for river management. Environ. Model. Softw. 2009, 24(8):982-993.
50. Nash D., Waters D., Buldu A., Wu Y., Lin Y., Yang W., Song Y., Shu J., Qin W., Hannah M. Using a conceptual Bayesian network to investigate environmental management of vegetation production in the Lake Taihu region of China. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 46:170-181.
51. Newton A.C. Use of a Bayesian network for Red Listing under uncertainty. Environ. Model. Softw. 2010, 25:15-23.
52. Ottaviani D., Lasinio G.J., Boitani L. Two statistical methods to validate habitat suitability models using presence-only data. Ecol. Model. 2004, 179:417-443.
53. Pearson R.G., Raxworthy C.J., Nakamura M., Peterson A.T. Predicting species distributions from small numbers of occurrence records: a test case using cryptic geckos in Madagascar. J. Biogeogr. 2006, 34(1):102-117.
54. Peterson C.H., McDonald L.L., Green R.H., Erickson W.P. Sampling design begets conclusions: the statistical basis for detection of injury to and recovery of shore-line communities after the 'Exxon Valdez' oil spill. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2001, 210:255-283.
55. Phillips S.J., Dudik M., Elith J., Graham C.H., Lehmann A., Leathwick J., Ferrier S. Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecol. Appl. 2009, 19:181-197.
56. Poff N.L., Allan J.D., Bain M.B., Karr J.R., Prestegaard K.L., Richter B.D., Sparks R.E., Stromberg J.C. The natural flow regime. Biosci. 1997, 47(11):769-784.
57. Pollino C.A., White A.K., Hart B.T. Examination of conflicts and improved strategies for the management of an endangered Eucalypt species using Bayesian networks. Ecol. Model. 2007, 201:37-59.
58. Pollino C.A., Woodberry O., Nicholson A., Korb K., Hart B.T. Parameterisation and evaluation of a Bayesian network for use in an ecological risk assessment. Environ. Model. Softw. 2007, 22:1140-1152.
59. Reichert P., Omlin M. On the usefulness of overparameterized ecological models. Ecol. Model. 1997, 95:289-299.
60. Reese G.C., Wilson K.R., Hoeting J.A., Flather C.H. Factors affecting species distribution predictions: a simulation modeling experiment. Ecol. Appl. 2005, 15:554-564.
61. Rosenfield G.H., Fitzpatrick-Lins K. A coefficient of agreement as a measure of thematic classification accuracy. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 1986, 52(2):223-227.
62. Rushton S.P., Ormerod S.J., Kerby G. New paradigms for modelling species distributions. J. Appl. Ecol. 2004, 41:193-200.
63. Shepherd T., Gardner C., Green B.S., Richardson A. Estimating survival of the Tayatea Astacopsis gouldi (Crustacea, Decapoda, Parastacidae), an iconic, threatened freshwater invertebrate. J. Shellfish Res. 2011, 30:139-145.
64. Shin M.-J., Guillaume J.H.A., Croke B.F.W., Jakeman A.J. Addressing ten questions about conceptual rainfall-runoff models with global sensitivity analyses in R. J. Hydrol. 2013, 503:135-152.
65. Sinclair S.J., White M.D., Newell G.R. How useful are species distribution models for managing biodiversity under future climates?. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15(1). (Art 8).
66. Singh N.J., Yoccoz N.G., Bhatnagar Y.V., Fox J.L. Using habitat suitability models to sample rare species in high-altitude ecosystems: a case study with Tibetan argali. Biodivers. Conserv. 2009, 18(11):2893-2908.
67. Smith C.S., Howes A.L., Price B., McAlphine C.A. Using a Bayesian belief network to predict suitable habitat of an endangered mammal - the Julia Creek Dunnart (Sminthopsis douglasi). Biol. Conserv. 2007, 139:333-347.
68. Tantipisanuh N., Gale G.A., Pollino C. Bayesian networks for habitat suitability modeling: a potential tool for conservation planning with scarce resources. Ecol. Appl. 2014, 24:1705-1718.
69. Threatened Species Section Giant Freshwater Lobster Astacopsis gouldi Recovery Plan 2006-2010 2006, Department of Primary Industries and Water.
70. Tversky A., Kahnemann D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974, 185:1124-1131.
71. Tversky A., Kahnemann D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981, 211:453-458.
72. Uusitalo L. Advantages and challenges of Bayesian networks in environmental modelling. Ecol. Model. 2007, 203(3-4):312-318.
73. Van Allen T., Singh A., Greiner R., Hooper P. Quantifying the uncertainty of a belief net response: Bayesian error-bars for belief net inference. Artif. Intell. 2008, 172:483-513.
74. Walsh T. Patterns of Abundance of the Giant Tasmanian Freshwater Lobster (Astacopsis gouldi) in Relation to Habitat 2002, Unpublished Draft, Tasmanian Inland Fisheries Service.
75. Warton D.I., Renner I.W., Ramp D. Model-based control of observer bias for the analysis of presence-only data in ecology. PLOS ONE 2013, 8(11):e79168.
76. Wisz M.S., Hijmans R.J., Li J., Peterson A.T., Graham C.H., Guisan A., NCEAS Effects of sample size on the performance of species distribution models. Divers. Distrib. 2008, 14:763-773.
77. Young W.J., Marston F.M., Davis J.R. Nutrient exports and land use in Australian catchments. J. Environ. Manage. 1996, 47:165-183.