4.4 Review

A practical overview of transferability in species distribution modeling

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 127-133

出版社

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1139/er-2016-0045

关键词

species distribution model; spatially explicit model; spatial transferability; temporal transferability; downscaling; multicollinearity

资金

  1. Spanish Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad (MINECO)
  2. Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM) through a 'Ramon y Cajal' contract [RYC-2012-11970]
  3. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion [AGL2013-48523-C3-1-R]
  4. Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment, Spanish National Park Network [1098/2014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Species distribution models (SDMs) are basic tools in ecology, biogeography, and biodiversity. The usefulness of SDMs has expanded beyond the realm of ecological sciences, and their application in other research areas is currently frequent, e.g., spatial epidemiology. In any research area, the principal interest in these models resides in their capacity to predict species response in new scenarios, i.e., the models' transferability. Although the transferability of SDMs has been the subject of interest for many years, only in the 2000s did this topic gain particular attention. This article reviews the concept of the transferability of SDMs to new spatial scenarios, temporal periods, and (or) spatial resolutions, along with the potential constraints of the model's transferability, and more specifically: (i) the type of predictors and multicollinearity, (ii) the model complexity, and (iii) the species' intrinsic traits. Finally, we describe a practicable analytical protocol to be assessed before transferring a model to a new scenario. This protocol is based on three fundamental pillars: the environmental equilibrium of the species with the environment, the environmental similarity between the new scenario, and the areas used to model parametrisation and the correlation structure among predictors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据