Get access

Uncertainty associated with survey design in Species Distribution Models

Authors

  • Geiziane Tessarolo,

    Corresponding author
    1. Departamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, ICB, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Brazil
    2. Departamento de Biogeografía y Cambio Global, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), Madrid, Spain
    • Correspondence: Geiziane Tessarolo, Departamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, ICB, Universidade Federal de Goiás, UFG Campus II, Goiânia, GO 74001-970, Brazil.

      E-mail: geites@gmail.com

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Thiago F. Rangel,

    1. Departamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, ICB, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Brazil
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Miguel B. Araújo,

    1. Departamento de Biogeografía y Cambio Global, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), Madrid, Spain
    2. Imperial College London, Ascot, Berks, UK
    3. Research Network in Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology (InBIO), Research Center in Biodiversity and Genetic Resources (CIBIO), University of Évora, Évora, Portugal
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Joaquín Hortal

    1. Departamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, ICB, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, Brazil
    2. Departamento de Biogeografía y Cambio Global, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), Madrid, Spain
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Aim

Species distribution models (SDM) can be used to predict the location of unknown populations from known species occurrences. It follows that how the data used to calibrate the models are collected can have a great impact on prediction success. We evaluated the influence of different survey designs and their interaction with the modelling technique on SDM performance.

Location

Iberian Peninsula.

Methods

We examine how data recorded using seven alternative survey designs (random, systematic, environmentally stratified by class and environmentally stratified using P-median, biased due to accessibility, biased by human density aggregation and biased towards protected areas) could affect SDM predictions generated with nine modelling techniques (BIOCLIM, Gower distance, Mahalanobis distance, Euclidean distance, GLM, MaxEnt, ENFA and Random Forest). We also study how sample size, species’ characteristics and modelling technique affected SDM predictive ability, using six evaluation metrics.

Results

Survey design has a small effect on prediction success. Characteristics of species’ ranges rank highest among the factors affecting SDM results: the species with lower relative occurrence area (ROA) are predicted better. Model predictions are also improved when sample size is large.

Main conclusions

The species modelled – particularly the extent of its distribution – are the largest source of influence over SDM results. The environmental coverage of the surveys is more important than the spatial structure of the calibration data. Therefore, climatic biases in the data should be identified to avoid erroneous conclusions about the geographic patterns of species distributions.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary