MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221065167 · doi:10.1111/geb.13482

How well do species distribution models predict occurrences in exotic ranges?

2022· article· en· W4221065167 on OpenAlexafffund
Dat Tien Nguyen, Brian Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Ecology and Biogeography · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsTransferabilityRange (aeronautics)Species distributionEcologyTaxonEnvironmental niche modellingMacroecologyIntroduced speciesTaxonomic rankEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiologyBiodiversityHabitatStatisticsEcological nicheMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Species distribution models (SDMs) are widely used predictive tools to forecast potential biological invasions. However, the reliability of SDMs extrapolated to exotic ranges remains understudied, with most analyses restricted to few species and equivocal results. We examine the spatial transferability of SDMs for 647 non‐indigenous species extrapolated across 1,867 invaded ranges, and identify what factors may help differentiate predictive success from failure. Location Global. Time period Current. Major taxa studied Six hundred and forty‐seven terrestrial species; eight taxonomic classes. Methods We performed a large‐scale assessment of the transferability of SDMs using two modelling approaches: generalized additive models (GAMs) and MaxEnt. We fitted SDMs on the native ranges of species and extrapolated them to exotic ranges. We examined the influence of general factors and factors related to biological invasions on spatial transferability. Results Despite both modelling approaches performing well in the range of the species used for fitting, we observed moderate to low spatial transferability on average (mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] ~ .7) when extrapolating to their invaded ranges. Transferability differed between taxonomic classes and invaded continents and was positively influenced by the performance of the model and environmental generalism in the native range, and the year of first record. Models performed worse with greater environmental coverage in the exotic range, gross domestic product and number of occurrences in the native range, geographic distance between ranges and when extrapolating to islands. Main conclusions After controlling for sampling bias, half of SDMs were only weakly predictive, which should affect how SDM‐based forecasts are interpreted. Performance differed based on characteristics of the data, species, and ranges, and can suggest when SDMs may be reliable and when we should be most cautious. These considerations touch directly upon the potential use of SDMs for management of biological invasions. We discuss possible mechanisms of these findings.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations46
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Ecology and BiogeographySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207