Christine Breitenmoser-Wuersten

Bio: Christine Breitenmoser-Wuersten is an academic researcher from International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. The author has contributed to research in topics: Sampling bias & Environmental niche modelling. The author has an hindex of 2, co-authored 2 publications receiving 617 citations.

The importance of correcting for sampling bias in MaxEnt species distribution models

Abstract: Aim Advancement in ecological methods predicting species distributions is a crucial precondition for deriving sound management actions. Maximum entropy (MaxEnt) models are a popular tool to predict species distributions, as they are considered able to cope well with sparse, irregularly sampled data and minor location errors. Although a fundamental assumption of MaxEnt is that the entire area of interest has been systematically sampled, in practice, MaxEnt models are usually built from occurrence records that are spatially biased towards better-surveyed areas. Two common, yet not compared, strategies to cope with uneven sampling effort are spatial filtering of occurrence data and background manipulation using environmental data with the same spatial bias as occurrence data. We tested these strategies using simulated data and a recently collated dataset on Malay civet Viverra tangalunga in Borneo. Location Borneo, Southeast Asia. Methods We collated 504 occurrence records of Malay civets from Borneo of which 291 records were from 2001 to 2011 and used them in the MaxEnt analysis (baseline scenario) together with 25 environmental input variables. We simulated datasets for two virtual species (similar to a range-restricted highland and a lowland species) using the same number of records for model building. As occurrence records were biased towards north-eastern Borneo, we investigated the efficacy of spatial filtering versus background manipulation to reduce overprediction or underprediction in specific areas. Results Spatial filtering minimized omission errors (false negatives) and commission errors (false positives). We recommend that when sample size is insufficient to allow spatial filtering, manipulation of the background dataset is preferable to not correcting for sampling bias, although predictions were comparatively weak and commission errors increased. Main Conclusions We conclude that a substantial improvement in the quality of model predictions can be achieved if uneven sampling effort is taken into account, thereby improving the efficacy of species conservation planning.

RESEARCH The importance of correcting for sampling bias in MaxEnt species distribution models

Abstract: Aim Advancement in ecological methods predicting species distributions is a crucial precondition for deriving sound management actions. Maximum entropy (MaxEnt) models are a popular tool to predict species distributions, as they are considered able to cope well with sparse, irregularly sampled data and minor location errors. Although a fundamental assumption of MaxEnt is that the entire area of interest has been systematically sampled, in practice, MaxEnt models are usually built from occurrence records that are spatially biased towards better-surveyed areas. Two common, yet not compared, strategies to cope with uneven sampling effort are spatial filtering of occurrence data and background manipulation using environmental data with the same spatial bias as occurrence data. We tested these strategies using simulated data and a recently collated dataset on Malay civet Viverra tangalunga in Borneo.

spThin: an R package for spatial thinning of species occurrence records for use in ecological niche models

Abstract: Spatial thinning of species occurrence records can help address problems associated with spatial sampling biases. Ideally, thinning removes the fewest records necessary to substantially reduce the effects of sampling bias, while simultaneously retaining the greatest amount of useful information. Spatial thinning can be done manually; however, this is prohibitively time consuming for large datasets. Using a randomization approach, the ‘thin’ function in the spThin R package returns a dataset with the maximum number of records for a given thinning distance, when run for sufficient iterations. We here provide a worked example for the Caribbean spiny pocket mouse, where the results obtained match those of manual thinning.

Mapping species distributions with MAXENT using a geographically biased sample of presence data: a performance assessment of methods for correcting sampling bias.

Abstract: MAXENT is now a common species distribution modeling (SDM) tool used by conservation practitioners for predicting the distribution of a species from a set of records and environmental predictors. However, datasets of species occurrence used to train the model are often biased in the geographical space because of unequal sampling effort across the study area. This bias may be a source of strong inaccuracy in the resulting model and could lead to incorrect predictions. Although a number of sampling bias correction methods have been proposed, there is no consensual guideline to account for it. We compared here the performance of five methods of bias correction on three datasets of species occurrence: one “virtual” derived from a land cover map, and two actual datasets for a turtle (Chrysemys picta) and a salamander (Plethodon cylindraceus). We subjected these datasets to four types of sampling biases corresponding to potential types of empirical biases. We applied five correction methods to the biased samples and compared the outputs of distribution models to unbiased datasets to assess the overall correction performance of each method. The results revealed that the ability of methods to correct the initial sampling bias varied greatly depending on bias type, bias intensity and species. However, the simple systematic sampling of records consistently ranked among the best performing across the range of conditions tested, whereas other methods performed more poorly in most cases. The strong effect of initial conditions on correction performance highlights the need for further research to develop a step-by-step guideline to account for sampling bias. However, this method seems to be the most efficient in correcting sampling bias and should be advised in most cases.

A standard protocol for reporting species distribution models

Abstract: Species distribution models (SDMs) constitute the most common class of models across ecology, evolution and conservation. The advent of ready-to-use software pack - ages and increasing availability of digital geoinformation have considerably assisted the application of SDMs in the past decade, greatly enabling their broader use for informing conservation and management, and for quantifying impacts from global change. However, models must be fit for purpose, with all important aspects of their development and applications properly considered. Despite the widespread use of SDMs, standardisation and documentation of modelling protocols remain limited, which makes it hard to assess whether development steps are appropriate for end use. To address these issues, we propose a standard protocol for reporting SDMs, with an emphasis on describing how a study’s objective is achieved through a series of model - ing decisions. We call this the ODMAP (Overview, Data, Model, Assessment and Prediction) protocol, as its components reflect the main steps involved in building SDMs and other empirically-based biodiversity models. The ODMAP protocol serves two main purposes. First, it provides a checklist for authors, detailing key steps for model building and analyses, and thus represents a quick guide and generic workflow for modern SDMs. Second, it introduces a structured format for documenting and communicating the models, ensuring transparency and reproducibility, facilitating peer review and expert evaluation of model quality, as well as meta-analyses. We detail all elements of ODMAP, and explain how it can be used for different model objectives and applications, and how it complements efforts to store associated metadata and define modelling standards. We illustrate its utility by revisiting nine previously published case studies, and provide an interactive web-based application to facilitate its use. We plan to advance ODMAP by encouraging its further refinement and adoption by the scientific community.

Where are Europe's last primary forests?

Abstract: Francesco Maria Sabatini1 | Sabina Burrascano2 | William S. Keeton3 | Christian Levers1 | Marcus Lindner4 | Florian Pötzschner1 | Pieter Johannes Verkerk5 | Jürgen Bauhus6 | Erik Buchwald7 | Oleh Chaskovsky8 | Nicolas Debaive9 | Ferenc Horváth10 | Matteo Garbarino11 | Nikolaos Grigoriadis12 | Fabio Lombardi13 | Inês Marques Duarte14 | Peter Meyer15 | Rein Midteng16 | Stjepan Mikac17 | Martin Mikoláš18 | Renzo Motta11 | Gintautas Mozgeris19 | Leónia Nunes14,20 | Momchil Panayotov21 | Peter Ódor10 | Alejandro Ruete22 | Bojan Simovski23 | Jonas Stillhard24 | Miroslav Svoboda18 | Jerzy Szwagrzyk25 | Olli-Pekka Tikkanen26 | Roman Volosyanchuk27 | Tomas Vrska28 | Tzvetan Zlatanov29 | Tobias Kuemmerle1