The Predictive Performance and Stability of Six Species Distribution Models

被引:158
|
作者
Duan, Ren-Yan [1 ]
Kong, Xiao-Quan [1 ]
Huang, Min-Yi [1 ]
Fan, Wei-Yi [2 ]
Wang, Zhi-Gao [1 ]
机构
[1] Anqing Normal Coll, Sch Life Sci, Anqing, Anhui, Peoples R China
[2] Shaanxi Normal Univ, Coll Life Sci, Xian, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
来源
PLOS ONE | 2014年 / 9卷 / 11期
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES; CLIMATE-CHANGE; UNCERTAINTY; NICHE; CLASSIFICATION; FORESTS; OAK; CONSERVATION; DISTURBANCE; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0112764
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background: Predicting species' potential geographical range by species distribution models (SDMs) is central to understand their ecological requirements. However, the effects of using different modeling techniques need further investigation. In order to improve the prediction effect, we need to assess the predictive performance and stability of different SDMs. Methodology: We collected the distribution data of five common tree species (Pinus massoniana, Betula platyphylla, Quercus wutaishanica, Quercus mongolica and Quercus variabilis) and simulated their potential distribution area using 13 environmental variables and six widely used SDMs: BIOCLIM, DOMAIN, MAHAL, RF, MAXENT, and SVM. Each model run was repeated 100 times (trials). We compared the predictive performance by testing the consistency between observations and simulated distributions and assessed the stability by the standard deviation, coefficient of variation, and the 99% confidence interval of Kappa and AUC values. Results: The mean values of AUC and Kappa from MAHAL, RF, MAXENT, and SVM trials were similar and significantly higher than those from BIOCLIM and DOMAIN trials (p<0.05), while the associated standard deviations and coefficients of variation were larger for BIOCLIM and DOMAIN trials (p<0.05), and the 99% confidence intervals for AUC and Kappa values were narrower for MAHAL, RF, MAXENT, and SVM. Compared to BIOCLIM and DOMAIN, other SDMs (MAHAL, RF, MAXENT, and SVM) had higher prediction accuracy, smaller confidence intervals, and were more stable and less affected by the random variable (randomly selected pseudo-absence points). Conclusions: According to the prediction performance and stability of SDMs, we can divide these six SDMs into two categories: a high performance and stability group including MAHAL, RF, MAXENT, and SVM, and a low performance and stability group consisting of BIOCLIM, and DOMAIN. We highlight that choosing appropriate SDMs to address a specific problem is an important part of the modeling process.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Predictive performance of plant species distribution models depends on species traits
    Hanspach, Jan
    Kuehn, Ingolf
    Pompe, Sven
    Klotz, Stefan
    PERSPECTIVES IN PLANT ECOLOGY EVOLUTION AND SYSTEMATICS, 2010, 12 (03) : 219 - 225
  • [2] A comprehensive evaluation of predictive performance of 33 species distribution models at species and community levels
    Norberg, Anna
    Abrego, Nerea
    Blanchet, F. Guillaume
    Adler, Frederick R.
    Anderson, Barbara J.
    Anttila, Jani
    Araujo, Miguel B.
    Dallas, Tad
    Dunson, David
    Elith, Jane
    Foster, Scott D.
    Fox, Richard
    Franklin, Janet
    Godsoe, William
    Guisan, Antoine
    O'Hara, Bob
    Hill, Nicole A.
    Holt, Robert D.
    Hui, Francis K. C.
    Husby, Magne
    Kalas, John Atle
    Lehikoinen, Aleksi
    Luoto, Miska
    Mod, Heidi K.
    Newell, Graeme
    Renner, Ian
    Roslin, Tomas
    Soininen, Janne
    Thuiller, Wilfried
    Vanhatalo, Jarno
    Warton, David
    White, Matt
    Zimmermann, Niklaus E.
    Gravel, Dominique
    Ovaskainen, Otso
    ECOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS, 2019, 89 (03)
  • [3] Testing the predictive performance of distribution models
    Bahn, Volker
    McGill, Brian J.
    OIKOS, 2013, 122 (03) : 321 - 331
  • [4] Evaluating the predictive performance of stacked species distribution models applied to plant species selection in ecological restoration
    Gaston, Aitor
    Garcia-Vinas, Juan I.
    ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2013, 263 : 103 - 108
  • [5] To mix or not to mix: comparing the predictive performance of mixture models vs. separate species distribution models
    Hui, Francis K. C.
    Warton, David I.
    Foster, Scott D.
    Dunstan, Piers K.
    ECOLOGY, 2013, 94 (09) : 1913 - 1919
  • [6] Testing whether ensemble modelling is advantageous for maximising predictive performance of species distribution models
    Hao, Tianxiao
    Elith, Jane
    Lahoz-Monfort, Jose J.
    Guillera-Arroita, Gurutzeta
    ECOGRAPHY, 2020, 43 (04) : 549 - 558
  • [7] From individual to joint species distribution models: A comparison of model complexity and predictive performance
    Caradima, Bogdan
    Schuwirth, Nele
    Reichert, Peter
    JOURNAL OF BIOGEOGRAPHY, 2019, 46 (10) : 2260 - 2274
  • [8] Assessing the effect of prevalence on the predictive performance of species distribution models using simulated data
    Santika, Truly
    GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND BIOGEOGRAPHY, 2011, 20 (01): : 181 - 192
  • [9] The Effects of Sampling Bias and Model Complexity on the Predictive Performance of MaxEnt Species Distribution Models
    Syfert, Mindy M.
    Smith, Matthew J.
    Coomes, David A.
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (02):
  • [10] Effects of species prevalence on the performance of predictive models
    Sor, Ratha
    Park, Young-Seuk
    Boets, Pieter
    Goethals, Peter L. M.
    Lek, Sovan
    ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2017, 354 : 11 - 19