MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559624296 · doi:10.1111/jbi.12894

A quantitative synthesis of the importance of variables used in MaxEnt species distribution models

2016· article· en· W2559624296 on OpenAlexafffund
Johanna Bradie, Brian Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biogeography · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceMaximum temperatureVariable (mathematics)Species distributionVariablesHabitatEnvironment variableEcologyStatisticsPhysical geographyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyMathematicsBiologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim To synthesize the species distribution modelling ( SDM ) literature to inform which variables have been used in MaxEnt models for different taxa and to quantify how frequently they have been important for species’ distributions. Location Global. Methods We conducted a quantitative synthesis analysing the contribution of over 400 distinct environmental variables to 2040 MaxEnt SDM s for nearly 1900 species representing over 300 families. Environmental variables were grouped into 24 related factors and results were analysed by examining the frequency with which variables were found to be most important, the mean contribution of each variable (at various taxonomic levels), and using TrueSkill ™ , a Bayesian skill rating system. Results Precipitation, temperature, bathymetry, distance to water and habitat patch characteristics were the most important variables overall. Precipitation and temperature were analysed most frequently and one of these variables was often the most important predictor in the model (nearly 80% of models, when tested). Notably, distance to water was the most important variable in the highest proportion of models in which it was tested (42% of 225 models). For terrestrial species, precipitation, temperature and distance to water had the highest overall contributions, whereas for aquatic species, bathymetry, precipitation and temperature were most important. Main conclusions Over all MaxEnt models published, the ability to discriminate occurrence from reference sites was high (average AUC = 0.92). Much of this discriminatory ability was due to temperature and precipitation variables. Further, variability (temperature) and extremes (minimum precipitation) were the most predictive. More generally, the most commonly tested variables were not always the most predictive, with, for instance, ‘distance to water’ infrequently tested, but found to be very important when it was. Thus, the results from this study summarize the MaxEnt SDM literature, and can aid in variable selection by identifying underutilized, but potentially important variables, which could be incorporated in future modelling efforts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.062
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.195
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0620.195
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations421
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BiogeographySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207