Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Natureza & Conservaç...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Natureza & Conservação
Article . 2012 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
versions View all 1 versions
addClaim

Labeling Ecological Niche Models

Authors: Thiago Fernando Rangel; Rafael Dias Loyola;

Labeling Ecological Niche Models

Abstract

The ongoing biodiversity crisis is pushing ecologists and conservation biologists to develop models to foretell the effects of human-induced transformation of natural resources on the distribution of species, although ecology and biogeography still lacks a paradigmatic body of theory to fully understand the drivers of biodiversity patterns. Two decades of research on ecological niche models and species distributions have been characterized by technical development and discussions on a plethora of methods or algorithms to infer and predict species distributions. Here we suggest a metaphorical classification scheme for some of the most popular models based on their complexity, interpretability and suitability for specific applications in ecology and conservation biology. Our purpose is not to compare methods by their capacity to accurately predict the observed distribution of species, nor to criticize how they are commonly used in applied studies. Instead, we believe that a simple classification scheme can potentially highlight how some methods are more suited for specific applications in ecology and conservation biology. Envelope and distance-based models are grouped into the “fish bowl” category, for their transparency and simplicity. Statistical models are classified as “turbine” models, because of their hidden complexity and general applicability. Finally, machine-learning models are classified as “vault” models, for their high complexity and lack of interpretability of fit parameters. We conclude that the diversity of species distribution models used today is expected for a young research field, but the choice of modeling strategy depends on the purpose of the study. We provide some general guidelines for choosing models for studies of conservation planning and climate change mitigation and suggest models of intermediate complexity for conservation planning and forecast of climate change effects on biodiversity as they provide a good balance between interpretability, predictive power and robustness to model over-fit.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    100
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
100
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
gold
Related to Research communities
Italian National Biodiversity Future Center