Spatial scaling of environmental variables improves species-habitat models of fishes in a small, sand-bed lowland river

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 11, 2015, Pages

  Radinger, Johannes ^a   Wolter, Christian ^a   Kail, Jochem ^b  

^a LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE OF FRESHWATER ECOLOGY AND INLAND FISHERIES   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTROLLED STUDY; FISH; MODEL; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RIVER; SAMPLING; SPECIES HABITAT; STATISTICAL MODEL; VELOCITY; ANIMAL; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ECOSYSTEM; GEOGRAPHY; GERMANY; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; AREA UNDER CURVE; ECOSYSTEM; FISHES; GEOGRAPHY; GERMANY; LINEAR MODELS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RIVERS; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84956854881     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142813     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Franklin J. Mapping Species Distributions: Spatial Inference and Prediction. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2009.
2. Belletti B, Rinaldi M, Buijse AD, Gurnell AM, Mosselman E. A review of assessment methods for river hydromorphology. Environ Earth Sci. 2015; 73: 2079-2100. doi: 10.1007/s12665-014-3558-1
3. Gellert G, Pottgiesser T, Euler T. Assessment of the structural quality of streams in Germany-basic description and current status. Environ Monit Assess. 2014; 186: 3365-3378. doi: 10.1007/s10661-014-3623-y PMID: 24473681
4. Environment Agency. River Habitat Survey in Britain and Ireland, Field Survey Guidance Manual: 2003
5. Radinger J, Wolter C. Patterns and predictors of fish dispersal in rivers. Fish Fish. 2014; 15: 456-473. doi: 10.1111/faf.12028
6. Gowan C, Fausch KD. Mobile brook trout in two high-elevation Colorado streams: reevaluating the concept of restricted movement. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 1996; 53: 1370-1381. doi: 10.1139/cjfas-53-6-1370
7. Lucas MC, Baras E. Migration of Freshwater Fishes. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 2001.
8. Kail J, Wolter C. Pressures at larger spatial scales strongly influence the ecological status of heavily modified river water bodies in Germany. Sci Total Environ. 2013; 454-455: 40-50. doi: 10.1016/j. scitotenv.2013.02.096 PMID: 23542480
9. Fernández D, Barquín J, Raven PJ. A review of river habitat characterisation methods: indices vs. characterisation protocols. Limnetica. 2011; 30: 217-234.
10. Kail J, Hering D. The influence of adjacent stream reaches on the local ecological status of Central European mountain streams. River Res Appl. 2009; 25: 537-550. doi: 10.1002/rra.1238
11. Pottgiesser T, Sommerhäuser M. Beschreibung und Bewertung der deutschen Fließgewässertypen-Steckbriefe und Anhang. 2008. Available: www.fliessgewaesserbewertung.de
12. Illies J. Versuch einer allgemeinen biozönotischen Gliederung der Fließgewässer. Internationale Revue der gesamten Hydrobiologie und Hydrographie. 1961; 46: 205-213. doi: 10.1002/iroh. 19610460205
13. Schaarschmidt T, Arzbach HH, Bock R, Borkmann I, Brämick U, Brunke M, et al. Die Fischfauna der kleinen Fließgewässer Nord-und Nordostdeutschlands-Leitbildentwicklung und typgerechte Anpassung des Bewertungsschemas nach EU-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie. 2005.
14. Ministerium für Landwirtschaft Umwelt und ländliche Räume des Landes Schleswig-Holstein. Bewirtschaftungsplan nach Artikel 13 der Richtlinie 2000/60/EG für die Flussgebietseinheit Eider. 2009.
15. Dußling U. Handbuch zu fiBS. Schriftenreihe des Verbandes Deutscher Fischereiverwaltungsbeamter und Fischereiwissenschaftler eV. 2009;Heft 15: 1-72.
16. LAWA. Gewässerstrukturgütebewertung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Verfahren für kleine und mittelgroße Fließgewässer. Schwerin (Germany); 2000.
17. Kamp U, Binder W, Hölzl K. River habitat monitoring and assessment in Germany. Environ Monit Assess. 2007; 127: 209-226. doi: 10.1007/s10661-006-9274-x PMID: 17058007
18. Ahrens U. Gewässerstruktur: Kartierung und Bewertung der Fließgewässer in Schleswig-Holstein. Jahresbericht. Flintbek: Landesamt für Natur und Umwelt des Landes Schleswig-Holstein; 2007.
19. Strahler AN. Quantitative Analysis of Watershed Geomorphology. Transactions American Geophysical Union. 1957; 38: 913-920.
20. Shreve RL. Statistical Law of Stream Numbers. The Journal of Geology. 1966; 74: 17-37.
21. De'ath G. Boosted trees for ecological modeling and prediction. Ecology. 2007; 88: 243-51. PMID: 17489472
22. Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP, Dudík M, Ferrier S, Guisan A, et al. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography. 2006; 29: 129-151. doi: 10.1111/j.2006. 0906-7590.04596.x
23. Elith J, Leathwick JR, Hastie T. A working guide to boosted regression trees. J Anim Ecol. 2008; 77: 802-813. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01390.x PMID: 18397250
24. Hijmans RJ, Phillips S, Leathwick J, Elith J. dismo: Species distribution modeling. 2014; Available: http://cran.r-project.org/package=dismo.
25. Elith J, Leathwick J. Boosted Regression Trees for ecological modeling. CRAN vignette. 2013; 1-22. Available: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/dismo/vignettes/brt.pdf.
26. Hijmans RJ, Elith J. Species distribution modeling with R. CRAN vignette. 2013; Available: http://cran.rproject. org/web/packages/dismo/vignettes/sdm.pdf.
27. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The Meaning and Use of the Area under a Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve. Radiology. 1982; 143: 29-36. PMID: 7063747
28. Mann HB, Whitney DR. On a Test of Whether One of Two Random Variables is Stochastically Larger than the Other. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 1947; 18: 50-60. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177730491
29. Allouche O, Tsoar A, Kadmon R. Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic (TSS). J Appl Ecol. 2006; 43: 1223-1232. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664. 2006.01214.x
30. Pearce J, Ferrier S. Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression. Ecol Modell. 2000; 133: 225-245.
31. Markovic D, Freyhof J, Wolter C. Where are all the fish: potential of biogeographical maps to project current and future distribution patterns of freshwater species. PLoS One. 2012; 7: e40530. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040530 PMID: 22792361
32. Kruskal WH, Wallis WA. Use of Ranks in One-Criterion Variance Analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1952; 47: 583-621.
33. Shaffer JP. Multiple Hypothesis Testing. Annu Rev Psychol. 1995; 46: 561-584. doi: 10.1146/annurev. ps.46.020195.003021
34. Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GM. Mixed Effects Models and Extensions in Ecology with R. New York: Springer; 2009.
35. Carpenter J, Bithell J. Bootstrap confidence intervals: when, which, what? A practical guide for medical statisticians. Statistics in Medicine. 2000; 19: 1141-1164. PMID: 10797513
36. GRASS Development Team. Geographic Resources Analysis Support System (GRASS) Software, Version 6.5SVN. Open Source Geospatial Foundation. 2010; Available: http://grass.osgeo.org.
37. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2013; Available: http://www.r-project.org.
38. Bivand R. spgrass6: Interface between GRASS 6 and R. 2013; Available: http://cran.r-project.org/package=spgrass6.
39. Hijmans RJ. raster: Geographic analysis and modeling. 2014; Available: http://cran.r-project.org/package=raster.
40. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. 2013; Available http://cran.r-project.org/package=lme4.
41. Guisan A, Thuiller W. Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. Ecol Lett. 2005; 8: 993-1009. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00792.x
42. Radinger J, Wolter C. Disentangling the effects of habitat suitability, dispersal, and fragmentation on the distribution of river fishes. Ecol Appl. 2015; 25: 914-927. doi: 10.1890/14-0422.1 PMID: 26465033
43. Bellamy C, Scott C, Altringham J. Multiscale, presence-only habitat suitability models: fine-resolution maps for eight bat species. J Appl Ecol. 2013; 50: 892-901. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12117
44. Dirnböck T, Dullinger S. Habitat distribution models, spatial autocorrelation, functional traits and dispersal capacity of alpine plant species. J Veg Sci. 2004; 15: 77-84.
45. Legendre P. Spatial Autocorrelation: Trouble or New Paradigm? Ecology. 1993; 74: 1659-1673.
46. Wuellner MR, Bramblett RG, Guy CS, Zale AV, Roberts DR, Johnson J. Reach and catchment-scale characteristics are relatively uninfluential in explaining the occurrence of stream fish species. J Fish Biol. 2013; 82: 1497-513. doi: 10.1111/jfb.12081 PMID: 23639150
47. Ruiz JC, Peterson JT. An Evaluation of the Relative Influence of Spatial, Statistical, and Biological Factors on the Accuracy of Stream Fish Species Presence Models. Trans Am Fish Soc. 2007; 136: 1640-1653. doi: 10.1577/T06-086.1
48. Trautwein C, Schinegger R, Schmutz S. Cumulative effects of land use on fish metrics in different types of running waters in Austria. Aquat Sci. 2012; 74: 329-341. doi: 10.1007/s00027-011-0224-5 PMID: 25983526
49. Filipe AF, Markovic D, Pletterbauer F, Tisseuil C, De Wever A, Schmutz S, et al. Forecasting fish distribution along stream networks: brown trout (Salmo trutta) in Europe. Divers Distrib. 2013; 1-13. doi: 10. 1111/ddi.12086
50. Markovic D, Carrizo S, Freyhof J, Cid N, Lengyel S, Scholz M, et al. Europe's freshwater biodiversity under climate change: Distribution shifts and conservation needs. Divers Distrib. 2014; 20: 1097-1107. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12232
51. Jähnig SC, Lorenz AW, Lorenz RR, Kail J. A comparison of habitat diversity and interannual habitat dynamics in actively and passively restored mountain rivers of Germany. Hydrobiologia. 2012; 712: 89-104. doi: 10.1007/s10750-012-1264-0
52. Angermeier PL, Krueger KL, Dolloff CA. Discontinuity in Stream-fish Distributions: Implications for Assessing and Predicting Species Occurence. In: Scott JM, Heglund PJ, Morrison ML, Haufler JB, Raphael MG, Wall WA, et al., editors. Predicting Species Occurences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale. Washington: Island Press; 2002. pp. 519-527.
53. Olden JD, Jackson DA. A comparison of statistical approaches for modelling fish species distributions. Freshw Biol. 2002; 47: 1976-1995.
54. Leclere J, Oberdorff T, Belliard J, Leprieur F. A comparison of modeling techniques to predict juvenile 0 + fish species occurrences in a large river system. Ecol Inform; 2011; 6: 276-285. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoinf. 2011.05.001
55. Ehrlén J, Morris WF. Predicting changes in the distribution and abundance of species under environmental change. Ecol Lett. 2015; 18: 303-314. doi: 10.1111/ele.12410 PMID: 25611188
56. Buisson L, Blanc L, Grenouillet G. Modelling stream fish species distribution in a river network: the relative effects of temperature versus physical factors. Ecol Freshw Fish. 2008; 17: 244-257. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0633.2007.00276.x
57. Knighton D. Fluvial Forms and Processes: A New Perspective. London: Arnold; 1998.
58. Brunke M. Hydromorphologische Indikatoren für den ökologischen Zustand der Fischfauna der unteren Forellenregion im norddeutschen Tiefland. Hydrologie und Wasserbewirtschaftung. 2008; 5: 234-244.
59. Melcher A, Schmutz S, Haidvogl G, Moder K. Spatially based methods to assess the ecological status of European fish assemblage types. Fish Manag Ecol. 2007; 14: 453-463. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2400. 2007.00583.x
60. Logez M, Bady P, Melcher A, Pont D. A continental-scale analysis of fish assemblage functional structure in European rivers. Ecography. 2013; 36: 80-91.
61. Austin MP, Cunningham RB, Fleming PM. New approaches to direct gradient analysis using environmental scalars and statistical curve-fitting procedures. Vegetatio. 1984; 55: 11-27.
62. Guisan A, Zimmermann NE. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Modell. 2000; 135: 147-186.
63. Muhar S, Jungwirth M. Habitat integrity of running waters-assessment criteria and their biological relevance. Hydrobiologia. 1998; 386: 195-202.