MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104375919 · doi:10.1111/ecog.05179

Transferability of trait‐based species distribution models

2020· article· en· W3104375919 on OpenAlexaff
Peter A. Vesk, William K. Morris, Will C. Neal, Karel Mokany, Laura J. Pollock

Bibliographic record

VenueEcography · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAustralian Academy of Science
KeywordsTraitTransferabilityTaxonEcologyLinear modelStatisticsBiologyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need for reliable prediction of species distributions dependent upon traits has been hindered by a lack of model transferability testing. We tested the predictive capacity of trait‐SDMs by fitting hierarchical generalised linear models with three trait and four environmental predictors for 20 eucalypt taxa in a reference region. We used these models to predict occurrence for a much larger set of taxa and target areas (82 taxa across 18 target regions) in south‐eastern Australia. Median predictive performance for new species in target regions was 0.65 (area under receiver operating curve) and 1.24 times random (area under precision recall curve). Prediction in target regions did not worsen with increasing geographic, environmental or community compositional distance from the reference region, and was improved with reliable trait–environment relationships. Transfer testing also identified trait–environment relationships that did not transfer. These results give confidence that traits and transfer testing can assist in the hard problem of predicting environmental responses for new species, environmental conditions and regions.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.097
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.097
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcographySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207