Spatially explicit species distribution models: A missed opportunity in conservation planning?

被引:40
|
作者
Domisch, Sami [1 ]
Friedrichs, Martin [1 ,2 ]
Hein, Thomas [3 ]
Borgwardt, Florian [3 ]
Wetzig, Annett [1 ]
Jaehnig, Sonja C. [1 ]
Langhans, Simone D. [1 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Leibniz Inst Freshwater Ecol & Inland Fisheries, Berlin, Germany
[2] Free Univ Berlin, Dept Biol, Berlin, Germany
[3] Univ Nat Resources & Life Sci, Inst Hydrobiol & Aquat Ecosyst Management, Vienna, Austria
[4] Univ Otago, Dept Zool, Dunedin, New Zealand
[5] BC3, Leioa, Spain
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
Bayesian hierarchical modelling; connectivity; gurobi; integer linear programming; spatial autocorrelation; spatial unit; BIOCLIMATE ENVELOPE MODELS; AUTOCORRELATION; MARINE; CONNECTIVITY; INFORMATION; ACCURACY; NETWORK; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1111/ddi.12891
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Aim Systematic conservation planning is vital for allocating protected areas given the spatial distribution of conservation features, such as species. Due to incomplete species inventories, species distribution models (SDMs) are often used for predicting species' habitat suitability and species' probability of occurrence. Currently, SDMs mostly ignore spatial dependencies in species and predictor data. Here, we provide a comparative evaluation of how accounting for spatial dependencies, that is, autocorrelation, affects the delineation of optimized protected areas. Location Southeast Australia, Southeast U.S. Continental Shelf, Danube River Basin. Methods We employ Bayesian spatially explicit and non-spatial SDMs for terrestrial, marine and freshwater species, using realm-specific planning unit shapes (grid, hexagon and subcatchment, respectively). We then apply the software gurobi to optimize conservation plans based on species targets derived from spatial and non-spatial SDMs (10%-50% each to analyse sensitivity), and compare the delineation of the plans. Results Across realms and irrespective of the planning unit shape, spatially explicit SDMs (a) produce on average more accurate predictions in terms of AUC, TSS, sensitivity and specificity, along with a higher species detection probability. All spatial optimizations meet the species conservation targets. Spatial conservation plans that use predictions from spatially explicit SDMs (b) are spatially substantially different compared to those that use non-spatial SDM predictions, but (c) encompass a similar amount of planning units. The overlap in the selection of planning units is smallest for conservation plans based on the lowest targets and vice versa. Main conclusions Species distribution models are core tools in conservation planning. Not surprisingly, accounting for the spatial characteristics in SDMs has drastic impacts on the delineation of optimized conservation plans. We therefore encourage practitioners to consider spatial dependencies in conservation features to improve the spatial representation of future protected areas.
引用
收藏
页码:758 / 769
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The Explicit Integration of Species Conceptual Models and Species Distribution Models as a Best Practice for Systematic Conservation Planning in California
    Parisi, Monica D.
    Greco, Steven E.
    CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME, 2021, 107 : 41 - 60
  • [2] Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning
    Minor, Emily S.
    Urban, Dean L.
    ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 2007, 17 (06) : 1771 - 1782
  • [3] A spatially explicit method for evaluating accuracy of species distribution models
    Smulders, Mary
    Nelson, Trisalyn A.
    Jelinski, Dennis E.
    Nielsen, Scott E.
    Stenhouse, Gordon B.
    DIVERSITY AND DISTRIBUTIONS, 2010, 16 (06) : 996 - 1008
  • [4] Conservation planning with spatially explicit models: a case for horseshoe bats in complex mountain landscapes
    Le Roux, Marie
    Redon, Mathilde
    Archaux, Frederic
    Long, Jed
    Vincent, Stephane
    Luque, Sandra
    LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY, 2017, 32 (05) : 1005 - 1021
  • [5] Conservation planning with spatially explicit models: a case for horseshoe bats in complex mountain landscapes
    Marie Le Roux
    Mathilde Redon
    Frédéric Archaux
    Jed Long
    Stéphane Vincent
    Sandra Luque
    Landscape Ecology, 2017, 32 : 1005 - 1021
  • [6] What are the roles of species distribution models in conservation planning?
    McShea, William J.
    ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, 2014, 41 (02) : 93 - 96
  • [7] Meeting species persistence targets under climate change: A spatially explicit conservation planning model
    Alagador, Diogo
    Cerdeira, Jorge Orestes
    DIVERSITY AND DISTRIBUTIONS, 2017, 23 (06) : 703 - 713
  • [8] Complementary strengths of spatially-explicit and multi-species distribution models
    Lany, Nina K.
    Zarnetske, Phoebe L.
    Finley, Andrew O.
    McCullough, Deborah G.
    ECOGRAPHY, 2020, 43 (03) : 456 - 466
  • [9] Sampling effort required for fitting spatially explicit models of species distribution dynamics
    Sola, Oriol
    Kery, Marc
    Aquilue, Nuria
    Brotons, Lluis
    ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2025, 501
  • [10] Uncovering hidden spatial structure in species communities with spatially explicit joint species distribution models
    Ovaskainen, Otso
    Roy, David B.
    Fox, Richard
    Anderson, Barbara J.
    METHODS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2016, 7 (04): : 428 - 436