Meta‐replication,sampling bias,and multi‐scale model selection: A case study on snow leopard (Panthera uncia) in western China

Replicated multiple scale species distribution models (SDMs) have become increasingly important to identify the correct variables determining species distribution and their influences on ecological responses. This study explores multi‐scale habitat relationships of the snow leopard (Panthera uncia) in two study areas on the Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau of western China. Our primary objectives were to evaluate the degree to which snow leopard habitat relationships, expressed by predictors, scales of response, and magnitude of effects, were consistent across study areas or locally landcape‐specific. We coupled univariate scale optimization and the maximum entropy algorithm to produce multivariate SDMs, inferring the relative suitability for the species by ensembling top performing models. We optimized the SDMs based on average omission rate across the top models and ensembles’ overlap with a simulated reference model. Comparison of SDMs in the two study areas highlighted landscape‐specific responses to limiting factors. These were dependent on the effects of the hydrological network, anthropogenic features, topographic complexity, and the heterogeneity of the landcover patch mosaic. Overall, even accounting for specific local differences, we found general landscape attributes associated with snow leopard ecological requirements, consisting of a positive association with uplands and ridges, aggregated low‐contrast landscapes, and large extents of grassy and herbaceous vegetation. As a means to evaluate the performance of two bias correction methods, we explored their effects on three datasets showing a range of bias intensities. The performance of corrections depends on the bias intensity; however, density kernels offered a reliable correction strategy under all circumstances. This study reveals the multi‐scale response of snow leopards to environmental attributes and confirms the role of meta‐replicated study designs for the identification of spatially varying limiting factors. Furthermore, this study makes important contributions to the ongoing discussion about the best approaches for sampling bias correction.     

Mechanistic variables can enhance predictive models of endotherm distributions: the American pika under current,past, and future climates

How climate constrains species’ distributions through time and space is an important question in the context of conservation planning for climate change. Despite increasing awareness of the need to incorporate mechanism into species distribution models (SDMs), mechanistic modeling of endotherm distributions remains limited in this literature. Using the American pika (Ochotona princeps) as an example, we present a framework whereby mechanism can be incorporated into endotherm SDMs. Pika distribution has repeatedly been found to be constrained by warm temperatures, so we used Niche Mapper, a mechanistic heat‐balance model, to convert macroclimate data to pika‐specific surface activity time in summer across the western United States. We then explored the difference between using a macroclimate predictor (summer temperature) and using a mechanistic predictor (predicted surface activity time) in SDMs. Both approaches accurately predicted pika presences in current and past climate regimes. However, the activity models predicted 8–19% less habitat loss in response to annual temperature increases of ~3–5 °C predicted in the region by 2070, suggesting that pikas may be able to buffer some climate change effects through behavioral thermoregulation that can be captured by mechanistic modeling. Incorporating mechanism added value to the modeling by providing increased confidence in areas where different modeling approaches agreed and providing a range of outcomes in areas of disagreement. It also provided a more proximate variable relating animal distribution to climate, allowing investigations into how unique habitat characteristics and intraspecific phenotypic variation may allow pikas to exist in areas outside those predicted by generic SDMs. Only a small number of easily obtainable data are required to parameterize this mechanistic model for any endotherm, and its use can improve SDM predictions by explicitly modeling a widely applicable direct physiological effect: climate‐imposed restrictions on activity. This more complete understanding is necessary to inform climate adaptation actions, management strategies, and conservation plans.     

Testing projected wild bee distributions in agricultural habitats: predictive power depends on species traits and habitat type

Species distribution models (SDM) are increasingly used to understand the factors that regulate variation in biodiversity patterns and to help plan conservation strategies. However, these models are rarely validated with independently collected data and it is unclear whether SDM performance is maintained across distinct habitats and for species with different functional traits. Highly mobile species, such as bees, can be particularly challenging to model. Here, we use independent sets of occurrence data collected systematically in several agricultural habitats to test how the predictive performance of SDMs for wild bee species depends on species traits, habitat type, and sampling technique. We used a species distribution modeling approach parametrized for the Netherlands, with presence records from 1990 to 2010 for 193 Dutch wild bees. For each species, we built a Maxent model based on 13 climate and landscape variables. We tested the predictive performance of the SDMs with independent datasets collected from orchards and arable fields across the Netherlands from 2010 to 2013, using transect surveys or pan traps. Model predictive performance depended on species traits and habitat type. Occurrence of bee species specialized in habitat and diet was better predicted than generalist bees. Predictions of habitat suitability were also more precise for habitats that are temporally more stable (orchards) than for habitats that suffer regular alterations (arable), particularly for small, solitary bees. As a conservation tool, SDMs are best suited to modeling rarer, specialist species than more generalist and will work best in long‐term stable habitats. The variability of complex, short‐term habitats is difficult to capture in such models and historical land use generally has low thematic resolution. To improve SDMs’ usefulness, models require explanatory variables and collection data that include detailed landscape characteristics, for example, variability of crops and flower availability. Additionally, testing SDMs with field surveys should involve multiple collection techniques.     

What do we gain from simplicity versus complexity in species distribution models?

Species distribution models (SDMs) are widely used to explain and predict species ranges and environmental niches. They are most commonly constructed by inferring species' occurrence–environment relationships using statistical and machine‐learning methods. The variety of methods that can be used to construct SDMs (e.g. generalized linear/additive models, tree‐based models, maximum entropy, etc.), and the variety of ways that such models can be implemented, permits substantial flexibility in SDM complexity. Building models with an appropriate amount of complexity for the study objectives is critical for robust inference. We characterize complexity as the shape of the inferred occurrence–environment relationships and the number of parameters used to describe them, and search for insights into whether additional complexity is informative or superfluous. By building ‘under fit’ models, having insufficient flexibility to describe observed occurrence–environment relationships, we risk misunderstanding the factors shaping species distributions. By building ‘over fit’ models, with excessive flexibility, we risk inadvertently ascribing pattern to noise or building opaque models. However, model selection can be challenging, especially when comparing models constructed under different modeling approaches. Here we argue for a more pragmatic approach: researchers should constrain the complexity of their models based on study objective, attributes of the data, and an understanding of how these interact with the underlying biological processes. We discuss guidelines for balancing under fitting with over fitting and consequently how complexity affects decisions made during model building. Although some generalities are possible, our discussion reflects differences in opinions that favor simpler versus more complex models. We conclude that combining insights from both simple and complex SDM building approaches best advances our knowledge of current and future species ranges.     

The role of demography,intra‐species variation,and species distribution models in species' projections under climate change

Organisms are projected to shift their distribution ranges under climate change. The typical way to assess range shifts is by species distribution models (SDMs), which predict species’ responses to climate based solely on projected climatic suitability. However, life history traits can impact species’ responses to shifting habitat suitability. Additionally, it remains unclear if differences in vital rates across populations within a species can offset or exacerbate the effects of predicted changes in climatic suitability on population viability. In order to obtain a fuller understanding of the response of one species to projected climatic changes, we coupled demographic processes with predicted changes in suitable habitat for the monocarpic thistle Carlina vulgaris across northern Europe. We first developed a life history model with species‐specific average fecundity and survival rates and linked it to a SDM that predicted changes in habitat suitability through time with changes in climatic variables. We then varied the demographic parameters based upon observed vital rates of local populations from a translocation experiment. Despite the fact that the SDM alone predicted C. vulgaris to be a climate ‘winner’ overall, coupling the model with changes in demography and small‐scale habitat suitability resulted in a matrix of stable, declining, and increasing patches. For populations predicted to experience declines or increases in abundance due to changes in habitat suitability, altered fecundity and survival rates can reverse projected population trends.     

Habitat availability and gene flow influence diverging local population trajectories under scenarios of climate change: a place‐based approach

Ecological niche theory holds that species distributions are shaped by a large and complex suite of interacting factors. Species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly used to describe species’ niches and predict the effects of future environmental change, including climate change. Currently, SDMs often fail to capture the complexity of species’ niches, resulting in predictions that are generally limited to climate‐occupancy interactions. Here, we explore the potential impact of climate change on the American pika using a replicated place‐based approach that incorporates climate, gene flow, habitat configuration, and microhabitat complexity into SDMs. Using contemporary presence–absence data from occupancy surveys, genetic data to infer connectivity between habitat patches, and 21 environmental niche variables, we built separate SDMs for pika populations inhabiting eight US National Park Service units representing the habitat and climatic breadth of the species across the western United States. We then predicted occurrence probability under current (1981–2010) and three future time periods (out to 2100). Occurrence probabilities and the relative importance of predictor variables varied widely among study areas, revealing important local‐scale differences in the realized niche of the American pika. This variation resulted in diverse and – in some cases – highly divergent future potential occupancy patterns for pikas, ranging from complete extirpation in some study areas to stable occupancy patterns in others. Habitat composition and connectivity, which are rarely incorporated in SDM projections, were influential in predicting pika occupancy in all study areas and frequently outranked climate variables. Our findings illustrate the importance of a place‐based approach to species distribution modeling that includes fine‐scale factors when assessing current and future climate impacts on species’ distributions, especially when predictions are intended to manage and conserve species of concern within individual protected areas.     

Wrong,but useful: regional species distribution models may not be improved by range‐wide data under biased sampling

Species distribution modeling (SDM) is an essential method in ecology and conservation. SDMs are often calibrated within one country's borders, typically along a limited environmental gradient with biased and incomplete data, making the quality of these models questionable. In this study, we evaluated how adequate are national presence‐only data for calibrating regional SDMs. We trained SDMs for Egyptian bat species at two different scales: only within Egypt and at a species‐specific global extent. We used two modeling algorithms: Maxent and elastic net, both under the point‐process modeling framework. For each modeling algorithm, we measured the congruence of the predictions of global and regional models for Egypt, assuming that the lower the congruence, the lower the appropriateness of the Egyptian dataset to describe the species' niche. We inspected the effect of incorporating predictions from global models as additional predictor (“prior”) to regional models, and quantified the improvement in terms of AUC and the congruence between regional models run with and without priors. Moreover, we analyzed predictive performance improvements after correction for sampling bias at both scales. On average, predictions from global and regional models in Egypt only weakly concur. Collectively, the use of priors did not lead to much improvement: similar AUC and high congruence between regional models calibrated with and without priors. Correction for sampling bias led to higher model performance, whatever prior used, making the use of priors less pronounced. Under biased and incomplete sampling, the use of global bats data did not improve regional model performance. Without enough bias‐free regional data, we cannot objectively identify the actual improvement of regional models after incorporating information from the global niche. However, we still believe in great potential for global model predictions to guide future surveys and improve regional sampling in data‐poor regions.     

Genetic trials improve the transfer of Douglas‐fir distribution models across continents

Climate change is likely to result in novel conditions with no analogy to current climate. Therefore, the application of species distribution models (SDMs) based on the correlation between observed species’ occurrence and their environment is questionable and calls for a better understanding of the traits that determine species occurrence. Here, we compared two intraspecific, trait‐based SDMs with occurrence‐based SDMs, all developed from European data, and analyzed their transferability to the native range of Douglas‐fir in North America. With data from 50 provenance trials of Douglas‐fir in central Europe multivariate universal response functions (URFs) were developed for two functional traits (dominant tree height and basal area) which are good indicators of growth and vitality under given environmental conditions. These trials included 290 North American provenances of Douglas‐fir. The URFs combine genetic effects i.e. the climate of provenance origin and environmental effects, i.e. the climate of planting locations into an integrated model to predict the respective functional trait from climate data. The URFs were applied as SDMs (URF‐SDMs) by converting growth performances into occurrence. For comparison, an ensemble occurrence‐based SDM was developed and block cross validated with the BIOMOD2 modeling platform utilizing the observed occurrence of Douglas‐fir in Europe. The two trait based SDMs and the occurrence‐based SDM, all calibrated with data from Europe, were applied to predict the known distribution of Douglas‐fir in its introduced and native range in Europe and North America. Both models performed well within their calibration range in Europe, but model transfer to its native range in North America was superior in case of the URF‐SDMs showing similar predictive power as SDMs developed in North America itself. The high transferability of the URF‐SDMs is a testimony of their applicability under novel climatic conditions highlighting the role of intraspecific trait variation for adaptation planning in climate change.     

Incorporating spatial autocorrelation into species distribution models alters forecasts of climate‐mediated range shifts

Species distribution models (SDMs) are widely used to forecast changes in the spatial distributions of species and communities in response to climate change. However, spatial autocorrelation (SA) is rarely accounted for in these models, despite its ubiquity in broad‐scale ecological data. While spatial autocorrelation in model residuals is known to result in biased parameter estimates and the inflation of type I errors, the influence of unmodeled SA on species' range forecasts is poorly understood. Here we quantify how accounting for SA in SDMs influences the magnitude of range shift forecasts produced by SDMs for multiple climate change scenarios. SDMs were fitted to simulated data with a known autocorrelation structure, and to field observations of three mangrove communities from northern Australia displaying strong spatial autocorrelation. Three modeling approaches were implemented: environment‐only models (most frequently applied in species' range forecasts), and two approaches that incorporate SA; autologistic models and residuals autocovariate (RAC) models. Differences in forecasts among modeling approaches and climate scenarios were quantified. While all model predictions at the current time closely matched that of the actual current distribution of the mangrove communities, under the climate change scenarios environment‐only models forecast substantially greater range shifts than models incorporating SA. Furthermore, the magnitude of these differences intensified with increasing increments of climate change across the scenarios. When models do not account for SA, forecasts of species' range shifts indicate more extreme impacts of climate change, compared to models that explicitly account for SA. Therefore, where biological or population processes induce substantial autocorrelation in the distribution of organisms, and this is not modeled, model predictions will be inaccurate. These results have global importance for conservation efforts as inaccurate forecasts lead to ineffective prioritization of conservation activities and potentially to avoidable species extinctions.     

The fate of European breeding birds under climate,land‐use and dispersal scenarios

Many species have already shifted their distributions in response to recent climate change. Here, we aimed at predicting the future breeding distributions of European birds under climate, land‐use, and dispersal scenarios. We predicted current and future distributions of 409 species within an ensemble forecast framework using seven species distribution models (SDMs), five climate scenarios and three emission and land‐use scenarios. We then compared results from SDMs using climate‐only variables, habitat‐only variables or both climate and habitat variables. In order to account for a species’ dispersal abilities, we used natal dispersal estimates and developed a probabilistic method that produced a dispersal scenario intermediate between the null and full dispersal scenarios generally considered in such studies. We then compared results from all scenarios in terms of future predicted range changes, range shifts, and variations in species richness. Modeling accuracy was better with climate‐only variables than with habitat‐only variables, and better with both climate and habitat variables. Habitat models predicted smaller range shifts and smaller variations in range size and species richness than climate models. Using both climate and habitat variables, it was predicted that the range of 71% of the species would decrease by 2050, with a 335 km median shift. Predicted variations in species richness showed large decreases in the southern regions of Europe, as well as increases, mainly in Scandinavia and northern Russia. The partial dispersal scenario was significantly different from the full dispersal scenario for 25% of the species, resulting in the local reduction of the future predicted species richness of up to 10%. We concluded that the breeding range of most European birds will decrease in spite of dispersal abilities close to a full dispersal hypothesis, and that given the contrasted predictions obtained when modeling climate change only and land‐use change only, both scenarios must be taken into consideration.     

Incorporating intraspecific variation into species distribution models improves distribution predictions,but cannot predict species traits for a wide-spread plant species

The most common approach to predicting how species ranges and ecological functions will shift with climate change is to construct correlative species distribution models (SDMs). These models use a species’ climatic distribution to determine currently suitable areas for the species and project its potential distribution under future climate scenarios. A core, rarely tested, assumption of SDMs is that all populations will respond equivalently to climate. Few studies have examined this assumption, and those that have rarely dissect the reasons for intraspecific differences. Focusing on the arctic-alpine cushion plant Silene acaulis, we compared predictive accuracy from SDMs constructed using the species’ full global distribution with composite predictions from separate SDMs constructed using subpopulations defined either by genetic or habitat differences. This is one of the first studies to compare multiple ways of constructing intraspecific-level SDMs with a species-level SDM. We also examine the contested relationship between relative probability of occurrence and species performance or ecological function, testing if SDM output can predict individual performance (plant size) and biotic interactions (facilitation). We found that both genetic- and habitat-informed SDMs are considerably more accurate than a species-level SDM, and that the genetic model substantially differs from and outperforms the habitat model. While SDMs have been used to infer population performance and possibly even biotic interactions, in our system these relationships were extremely weak. Our results indicate that individual subpopulations may respond differently to climate, although we discuss and explore several alternative explanations for the superior performance of intraspecific-level SDMs. We emphasize the need to carefully examine how to best define intraspecific-level SDMs as well as how potential genetic, environmental, or sampling variation within species ranges can critically affect SDM predictions. We urge caution in inferring population performance or biotic interactions from SDM predictions, as these often-assumed relationships are not supported in our study.     

A species‐centered approach for uncovering generalities in organism responses to habitat loss and fragmentation

Theoretical models predict strong influences of habitat loss and fragmentation on species distributions and demography, but empirical studies have shown relatively inconsistent support across species and systems. We argue that species’ responses to landscape‐scale habitat loss and fragmentation are likely to appear less idiosyncratic if it is recognized that species perceive the same landscapes in different ways. We present a new quantitative approach that uses species distribution models (SDMs) to measure landscapes (e.g. patch size, isolation, matrix amount) from the perspective of individual species. First, we briefly summarize the few efforts to date demonstrating that once differences in habitat distributions are controlled, consistencies in species’ responses to landscape structure emerge. Second, we present a detailed example providing step‐by‐step methods for application of a species‐centered approach using freely available land‐cover data and recent statistical modeling approaches. Third, we discuss pitfalls in current applications of the approach and recommend avenues for future developments. We conclude that the species‐centered approach offers considerable promise as a means to test whether sensitivity to habitat loss and fragmentation is mediated by phylogenetic, ecological, and life‐history traits. Cross‐species generalities in responses to habitat loss and fragmentation will be challenging to uncover unless landscape mosaics are defined using models that reflect differing species‐specific distributions, functional connectivity, and domains of scale. The emergence of such generalities would not only enhance scientific understanding of biotic processes driving fragmentation effects, but would allow managers to estimate species sensitivities in new regions.     

Performance evaluation of cetacean species distribution models developed using generalized additive models and boosted regression trees

Species distribution models (SDMs) are important management tools for highly mobile marine species because they provide spatially and temporally explicit information on animal distribution. Two prevalent modeling frameworks used to develop SDMs for marine species are generalized additive models (GAMs) and boosted regression trees (BRTs), but comparative studies have rarely been conducted; most rely on presence‐only data; and few have explored how features such as species distribution characteristics affect model performance. Since the majority of marine species BRTs have been used to predict habitat suitability, we first compared BRTs to GAMs that used presence/absence as the response variable. We then compared results from these habitat suitability models to GAMs that predict species density (animals per km²) because density models built with a subset of the data used here have previously received extensive validation. We compared both the explanatory power (i.e., model goodness of fit) and predictive power (i.e., performance on a novel dataset) of the GAMs and BRTs for a taxonomically diverse suite of cetacean species using a robust set of systematic survey data (1991–2014) within the California Current Ecosystem. Both BRTs and GAMs were successful at describing overall distribution patterns throughout the study area for the majority of species considered, but when predicting on novel data, the density GAMs exhibited substantially greater predictive power than both the presence/absence GAMs and BRTs, likely due to both the different response variables and fitting algorithms. Our results provide an improved understanding of some of the strengths and limitations of models developed using these two methods. These results can be used by modelers developing SDMs and resource managers tasked with the spatial management of marine species to determine the best modeling technique for their question of interest.     

Contribution of disturbance to distribution and abundance in a fire‐adapted system

Species distribution modeling (SDM) is an essential tool in understanding species ranges, but models haven't incorporated disturbance‐related variables. This is true even for regions where long histories of disturbance have resulted in disturbance‐adapted species. Therefore, the degree to which including disturbance‐related variables in SDMs might improve their performance is unclear. We used hierarchical partitioning to determine how fire patterns contribute to variation in species abundance and presence, examining both the total variation disturbance‐related variables explained, and how much of this variation is independent of soil and climate variables. For 27 Proteaceae species in the fire‐adapted Cape Floristic Region of South Africa , we found that fire variability, frequency, and area burned tended to have explanatory power similar in size to that of soil and climate variables. Importantly, for SDMs of abundance, fire‐related variables explained additional variation not captured by climatic variables, resulting in markedly increased model performance. In systems with high disturbance rates, species are less likely to be in equilibrium with their environment, and SDMs including variables describing disturbance regimes may be better able to capture the probability of a species being present at a site. Finally, the differential effect of fire on species abundance and presence suggests functional differences between these responses, which could hamper attempts to make predictions about species abundances using models of presence.     

Modeling bird species distribution change in fire prone Mediterranean landscapes: incorporating species dispersal and landscape dynamics

Species distribution models (SDMs) have traditionally been founded on the assumption that species distributions are in equilibrium with environmental conditions and that these species–environment relationships can be used to estimate species responses to environmental changes. Insight into the validity of this assumption can be obtained from comparing the performance of correlative species distribution models with more complex hybrid approaches, i.e. correlative and process‐based models that explicitly include ecological processes, thereby accounting for mismatches between habitat suitability and species occupancy patterns. Here we compared the ability of correlative SDMs and hybrid models, which can accommodate non‐equilibrium situations arising from dispersal constraints, to reproduce the distribution dynamics of the ortolan bunting Emberiza hortulana in highly dynamic, early successional, fire driven Mediterranean landscapes. Whereas, habitat availability was derived from a correlative statistical SDM, occupancy was modeled using a hybrid approach combining a grid‐based, spatially‐explicit population model that explicitly included bird dispersal with the correlative model. We compared species occupancy patterns under the equilibrium assumption and different scenarios of species dispersal capabilities. To evaluate the predictive capability of the different models, we used independent species data collected in areas affected to different degree by fires. In accordance with the view that disturbance leads to a disparity between the suitable habitat and the occupancy patterns of the ortolan bunting, our results indicated that hybrid modeling approaches were superior to correlative models in predicting species spatial dynamics. Furthermore, hybrid models that incorporated short dispersal distances were more likely to reproduce the observed changes in ortolan bunting distribution patterns, suggesting that dispersal plays a key role in limiting the colonization of recently burnt areas. We conclude that SDMs used in a dynamic context can be significantly improved by using combined hybrid modeling approaches that explicitly account for interactions between key ecological constraints such as dispersal and habitat suitability that drive species response to environmental changes.     

To Be Or Not to Be? Variable selection can change the projected fate of a threatened species under future climate

Species distribution models (SDMs) are commonly used to project future changes in the geographic ranges of species, to estimate extinction rates and to plan biodiversity conservation. However, these models can produce a range of results depending on how they are parameterized, and over‐reliance on a single model may lead to overconfidence in maps of future distributions. The choice of predictor variable can have a greater influence on projected future habitat than the range of climate models used. We demonstrate this in the case of the Ptunarra Brown Butterfly, a species listed as vulnerable in Tasmania, Australia. We use the Maxent model to develop future projections for this species based on three variable sets; all 35 commonly used so‐called ‘bioclimatic’ variables, a subset of these based on expert knowledge, and a set of monthly climate variables relevant to the species’ primary activity period. We used a dynamically downscaled regional climate model based on three global climate models. Depending on the choice of variable set, the species is projected either to experience very little contraction of habitat or to come close to extinction by the end of the century due to lack of suitable climate. The different conclusions could have important consequences for conservation planning and management, including the perceived viability of habitat restoration. The output of SDMs should therefore be used to define the range of possible trajectories a species may be on, and ongoing monitoring used to inform management as changes occur.     

Calibration of hybrid species distribution models: the value of general‐purpose vs. targeted monitoring data

Aim Temporally replicated observations are essential for the calibration and validation of species distribution models (SDMs) aiming at making temporal extrapolations. We study here the usefulness of a general‐purpose monitoring programme for the calibration of hybrid SDMs. As a benchmark case, we take the calibration with data from a monitoring programme that specifically surveys those areas where environmental changes expected to be relevant occur. Location Catalonia, north‐east of Spain. Methods We modelled the distribution changes of twelve open‐habitat bird species in landscapes whose dynamics are driven by fire and forest regeneration. We developed hybrid SDMs combining correlative habitat suitability with mechanistic occupancy models. We used observations from two monitoring programmes to provide maximum‐likelihood estimates for spread parameters: a common breeding bird survey (CBS) and a programme specifically designed to monitor bird communities within areas affected by wildfires (DINDIS). Results Both calibration with CBS and DINDIS data yielded sound spread parameter estimates and range dynamics that suggested dispersal limitations. However, compared to calibration with DINDIS data, calibration with CBS data leads to biased estimates of spread distance for seven species and to a higher degree of uncertainty in predicted range dynamics for six species. Main conclusions We have shown that available monitoring data can be used in the calibration of the mechanistic component of hybrid SDMs. However, if the dynamics of the target species occur within areas not well covered, general‐purpose monitoring data can lead to biased and inaccurate parameter estimates. To determine the potential usefulness of a given monitoring data set for the calibration of the mechanistic component of a hybrid SDM, we recommend quantifying the number of surveyed sites that are predicted to undergo habitat suitability changes.     

Individual species–area relationships and spatial patterns of species diversity in a Great Basin,semi‐arid shrubland

Traditional biodiversity metrics operate at the level of a plant community but do not capture spatial variation in diversity from a ‘plant's‐eye view’ of a community. Recently‐developed statistics consider the spatial patterns of plants as well as the number and distribution of species in local plant neighborhoods to quantitatively assess multispecies spatial patterns from a ‘plant's‐eye view’. We used one such statistic, the individual species area relationship (ISAR), to assess spatial patterns of species diversity in a Great Basin (USA) semi‐arid shrubland through an analysis of a spatial dataset on shrub species and locations. In conjunction with appropriate null models, the ISAR blends species area relationships with second‐order spatial statistics to measure the expected species richness in local neighborhoods of variable size around the individuals of a focal species within a community. We found that, contrary to a previous analysis using more traditional methods, the community was well‐mixed with a typical shrub surrounded on average by 4.9 shrub neighbors of 2.1 species at a neighborhood scale of 1.0 m. We also found statistically significant fine‐scale variation in diversity patterns, such that neighborhoods of two species were more diverse than expected by a heterogeneous Poisson null model that accounted for larger‐scale habitat heterogeneity. However, this effect was caused by intraspecific aggregation of these species and was not due to positive interspecific association. Contrary to previous findings in other semi‐arid shrublands, our analysis suggests that the spatial pattern of the shrub community was not significantly structured by interspecific facilitation. This result supports growing evidence for balanced species patterns of adult plants in multispecies communities. Our approach may be used in other communities to describe complex multispecies spatial patterns, quantify species‐specific associations with diversity patterns, and to generate hypotheses regarding relationships between patterns and community‐structuring processes.     

On the use of climate covariates in aquatic species distribution models: are we at risk of throwing out the baby with the bath water?

Species distribution models (SDMs) in river ecosystems can incorporate climate information by using air temperature and precipitation as surrogate measures of instream conditions or by using independent models of water temperature and hydrology to link climate to instream habitat. The latter approach is preferable but constrained by the logistical burden of developing water temperature and hydrology models. We therefore assessed whether regional scale, freshwater SDM predictions are fundamentally different when climate data versus instream temperature and hydrology are used as covariates. Maximum entropy (MaxEnt) SDMs were built for 15 freshwater fishes using one of two covariate sets: 1) air temperature and precipitation (climate variables) in combination with physical habitat variables; or 2) water temperature, hydrology (instream variables) and physical habitat. Three procedures were then used to compare results from climate vs instream models. First, equivalence tests assessed average pairwise differences (site‐specific comparisons throughout each species’ range) among climate and instream models. Second, ‘congruence’ tests determined how often the same stream segments were assigned high habitat suitability by climate and instream models. Third, Schoener's D and Warren's I niche overlap statistics quantified range‐wide similarity in predicted habitat suitability from climate vs instream models. Equivalence tests revealed small, pairwise differences in habitat suitability between climate and instream models (mean pairwise differences in MaxEnt raw scores for all species < 3 × 10^–4). Congruence tests showed a strong tendency for climate and instream models to predict high habitat suitability at the same stream segments (median congruence = 68%). D and I statistics reflected a high margin of overlap among climate and instream models (median D = 0.78, median I = 0.96). Overall, we found little support for the hypothesis that SDM predictions are fundamentally different when climate versus instream covariates are used to model fish species’ distributions at the scale of the Columbia Basin.     

Nondetection sampling bias in marked presence‐only data

相似文献