The shadow model: how and why small choices in spatially explicit species distribution models affect predictions

Author:

Commander Christian J. C.12,Barnett Lewis A. K.3,Ward Eric J.4ORCID,Anderson Sean C.5ORCID,Essington Timothy E.2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, United States of America

2. School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States

3. Resource Assessment and Conservation Engineering Division, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Seattle, Washington, United States

4. Conservation Biology Division, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Seattle, Washington, United States

5. Pacific Biological Station, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada

Abstract

The use of species distribution models (SDMs) has rapidly increased over the last decade, driven largely by increasing observational evidence of distributional shifts of terrestrial and aquatic populations. These models permit, for example, the quantification of range shifts, the estimation of species co-occurrence, and the association of habitat to species distribution and abundance. The increasing complexity of contemporary SDMs presents new challenges—as the choices among modeling options increase, it is essential to understand how these choices affect model outcomes. Using a combination of original analysis and literature review, we synthesize the effects of three common model choices in semi-parametric predictive process species distribution modeling: model structure, spatial extent of the data, and spatial scale of predictions. To illustrate the effects of these choices, we develop a case study centered around sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria) distribution on the west coast of the USA. The three modeling choices represent decisions necessary in virtually all ecological applications of these methods, and are important because the consequences of these choices impact derived quantities of interest (e.g., estimates of population size and their management implications). Truncating the spatial extent of data near the observed range edge, or using a model that is misspecified in terms of covariates and spatial and spatiotemporal fields, led to bias in population biomass trends and mean distribution compared to estimates from models using the full dataset and appropriate model structure. In some cases, these suboptimal modeling decisions may be unavoidable, but understanding the tradeoffs of these choices and impacts on predictions is critical. We illustrate how seemingly small model choices, often made out of necessity or simplicity, can affect scientific advice informing management decisions—potentially leading to erroneous conclusions about changes in abundance or distribution and the precision of such estimates. For example, we show how incorrect decisions could cause overestimation of abundance, which could result in management advice resulting in overfishing. Based on these findings and literature gaps, we outline important frontiers in SDM development.

Funder

NOAA Fisheries and the Environment (FATE) Program

Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean

Publisher

PeerJ

Subject

General Agricultural and Biological Sciences,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Medicine,General Neuroscience

Reference116 articles.

1. A review of Gaussian random fields and correlation functions;Abrahamsen;Norwegian Computing Center,1997

2. Benefits and risks of diversification for individual fishers;Anderson;Proceedings of The National Academy of Sciences,2017

3. Black swans in space: modeling spatiotemporal processes with extremes;Anderson;Ecology,2019

4. A reproducible data synopsis for over 100 species of British Columbia groundfish;Anderson;DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Research Document,2019

5. sdmTMB: spatiotemporal species distribution GLMMs with ‘TMB’;Anderson,2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3