SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

As a service to our authors and readers, this journal provides supporting information supplied by the authors. Such materials are peer-reviewed and may be re-organized for online delivery, but are not copy-edited or typeset. Technical support issues arising from supporting information (other than missing files) should be addressed to the authors.

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
ddi947-sup-0001-FigureS1-S3-TableS1-S3-AppendixS1.docxWord document506KFigure S1. Distribution of model parameters showing (a) Probability of survey using logistic regression and a threatened species and protected areas hypothesis (‘conservation concern’), with important explanatory variables of (b) frequency of protected areas per grid cell, (c) number of different habitats per grid cell, (d) detection of a threatened species during the main atlas period in 1998–2002, and (e) road density, a single variable that explained a high level of deviance Figure S2. Discrimination capacity of the optimal distribution model developed for surveys between 2003 and 2007 in the south-west biodiversity hotspot, showing (a) distribution of predicted probability values associated with either surveyed (solid line) or unsurveyed (dotted line) cells, (b) a boxplot of absence vs. presence values for 2003–2007 relative to their predicted probability of being surveyed, and (c) the ROC curve (AUC = 0.829) Figure S3. Discrimination capacity of the optimal distribution model (‘conservation concern’), tested with surveys between 2008 and 2011 in the south-west biodiversity hotspot, showing (a) distribution of predicted probability values associated with either surveyed (solid line) or unsurveyed (dotted line) cells, (b) a boxplot of absence vs. presence values for 2008–2011 relative to their predicted probability of being surveyed, and (c) the ROC curve (AUC = 0.729) Table S1. Background on derivation of environmental variables for each grid cell used in the modelling process. Table S2. GLM of the importance of prior knowledge for predicting future surveys (response variable: number of surveys per grid cell 2003–2007). Table S3. Model parameters for the three accessibility models. Appendix S1. Species distribution modelling details

Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.