1472-4642/asset/ddi_left.gif?v=1&s=b5c0734a11efd255b2215c418a42d0a633a003aa)
Biodiversity Research
Use of predictive habitat modelling to assess the distribution and extent of the current protection of ‘listed’ deep-sea habitats
Article first published online: 8 OCT 2012
DOI: 10.1111/ddi.12010
© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Additional Information
How to Cite
Ross, R. E. and Howell, K. L. (2013), Use of predictive habitat modelling to assess the distribution and extent of the current protection of ‘listed’ deep-sea habitats. Diversity and Distributions, 19: 433–445. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12010
Publication History
- Issue published online: 15 MAR 2013
- Article first published online: 8 OCT 2012
Funded by
- BBC Wildlife Fund and Oak Foundation
Keywords:
- Deep-sea;
- habitat modelling;
- marine conservation;
- marine protected areas;
- MaxEnt;
- NE Atlantic
Abstract
Aim
To demonstrate the application of predictive species distribution modelling methods to habitat mapping and assessment of percentage area-based conservation targets.
Location
The NE Atlantic deep sea (UK and Irish extended continental shelf limits).
Methods
MaxEnt modelling of three listed habitats (Lophelia pertusa (Linnaeus, 1758) reef (LpReef), Pheronema carpenteri (WyvilleThomson, 1869) aggregations (PcAggs) and Syringammina fragilissima (Brady, 1883) aggregations (SfAggs)), with some pre-selection of variables by generalized additive modelling. Models are validated using repeated 70/30 build/test data splits using AUC and threshold-dependent assessment methods. Predicted distribution maps are used to assess the adequacy of existing area closures for the protection of listed habitats and to assess percentage representation of each community within existing MPA networks.
Results
Model performances are rated as fair (LpReef), excellent (PcAggs) and good (SfAggs). Current closures are focused on the protection of cold-water coral reef and incidentally capture some SfAggs suitable environments, but largely fail to protect PcAggs. Considering the wider network of MPAs in the study region, approximately 23% (LpReef), 2% (PcAggs) and 6% (SfAggs) of the area predicted as suitable for each habitat respectively is contained within an MPA.
Main conclusions
To date, decisions on area closures for the protection of ‘listed’ deep-sea habitats have been based on maps of recorded presence of species that are taken as being indicative of that habitat. Predictive habitat modelling may provide a useful method of better estimating the extent of listed habitats, providing direction for future MPA establishment and a means of assessing MPA network effectiveness against politically set percentage targets. Given the coarse resolution of the model, percentages should be taken as maximal figures, with habitat occurrence likely to be less prevalent in reality.