Testing the utility of species distribution modelling using Random Forests for a species in decline

被引:17
作者
Burns, Phoebe A. [1 ]
Clemann, Nick [2 ]
White, Matt [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Sch Biosci, Melbourne, Vic 3010, Australia
[2] Arthur Rylah Inst Environm Res, Dept Environm Land Water & Planning, Heidelberg, Vic, Australia
关键词
threatened species; species distribution modelling; model testing; ground truth; sensitivity and specificity; MOUSE PSEUDOMYS-NOVAEHOLLANDIAE; SELECTING THRESHOLDS; CONSERVATION; BIODIVERSITY; PREDICTION; ACCURACY; CLASSIFICATION; PERFORMANCE; PREVALENCE; TASMANIA;
D O I
10.1111/aec.12884
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Habitat suitability estimates derived from species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly used to guide management of threatened species. Poorly estimating species' ranges can lead to underestimation of threatened status, undervaluing of remaining habitat and misdirection of conservation funding. We aimed to evaluate the utility of a SDM, similar to the models used to inform government regulation of habitat in our study region, in estimating the contemporary distribution of a threatened and declining species. We developed a presence-only SDM for the endangered New Holland Mouse (Pseudomys novaehollandiae) across Victoria, Australia. We conducted extensive camera trap surveys across model-predicted and expert-selected areas to generate an independent data set for use in evaluating the model, determining confidence in absence data from non-detection sites with occupancy and detectability modelling. We assessed the predictive capacity of the model at thresholds based on (1) sum of sensitivity and specificity (SSS), and (2) the lowest presence threshold (LPT; i.e. the lowest non-zero model-predicted habitat suitability value at which we detected the species). We detected P. novaehollandiae at 40 of 472 surveyed sites, with strong support for the species' probable absence from non-detection sites. Based on our post hoc optimised SSS threshold of the SDM, 25% of our detection sites were falsely predicted as non-suitable habitat and 75% of sites predicted as suitable habitat did not contain the species at the time of our survey. One occupied site had a model-predicted suitability value of zero, and at the LPT, 88% of sites predicted as suitable habitat did not contain the species at the time of our survey. Our findings demonstrate that application of generic SDMs in both regulatory and investment contexts should be tempered by considering their limitations and currency. Further, we recommend engaging species experts in the extrapolation and application of SDM outputs.
引用
收藏
页码:706 / 716
页数:11
相关论文
共 76 条
  • [1] Fit-for-Purpose: Species Distribution Model Performance Depends on Evaluation Criteria - Dutch Hoverflies as a Case Study
    Aguirre-Gutierrez, Jesus
    Carvalheiro, Luisa G.
    Polce, Chiara
    van Loon, E. Emiel
    Raes, Niels
    Reemer, Menno
    Biesmeijer, Jacobus C.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (05):
  • [2] [Anonymous], ECOGRAPHY
  • [3] Uninformative Parameters and Model Selection Using Akaike's Information Criterion
    Arnold, Todd W.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2010, 74 (06) : 1175 - 1178
  • [4] Testing the predictive performance of distribution models
    Bahn, Volker
    McGill, Brian J.
    [J]. OIKOS, 2013, 122 (03) : 321 - 331
  • [5] Selecting pseudo-absences for species distribution models: how, where and how many?
    Barbet-Massin, Morgane
    Jiguet, Frederic
    Albert, Cecile Helene
    Thuiller, Wilfried
    [J]. METHODS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2012, 3 (02): : 327 - 338
  • [6] Poor historical data drive conservation complacency: The case of mammal decline in south-eastern Australian forests
    Bilney, Rohan J.
    [J]. AUSTRAL ECOLOGY, 2014, 39 (08) : 875 - 886
  • [7] Underestimated and severe: Small mammal decline from the forests of south-eastern Australia since European settlement, as revealed by a top-order predator
    Bilney, Rohan J.
    Cooke, Raylene
    White, John G.
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2010, 143 (01) : 52 - 59
  • [8] Random forests
    Breiman, L
    [J]. MACHINE LEARNING, 2001, 45 (01) : 5 - 32
  • [9] Comparing species distribution models constructed with different subsets of environmental predictors
    Bucklin, David N.
    Basille, Mathieu
    Benscoter, Allison M.
    Brandt, Laura A.
    Mazzotti, Frank J.
    Romanach, Stephanie S.
    Speroterra, Carolina
    Watling, James I.
    [J]. DIVERSITY AND DISTRIBUTIONS, 2015, 21 (01) : 23 - 35
  • [10] Burnham KP., 2002, Model selection and multimodel inference: A practical information-theoretic approach