IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v498y2024ics0304380024002539.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Generating pseudo-absences in the ecological space improves the biological relevance of response curves in species distribution models

Author

Listed:
  • Broussin, Joséphine
  • Mouchet, Maud
  • Goberville, Eric

Abstract

Species distribution modeling (SDM) is widely used to predict past and future species distributions. However, absence data for species can be scarce or even nonexistent, necessitating the generation of pseudo-absences (PA). Traditionally, PA are generated based on geographic locations where the species is not observed, but this method can introduce biases related to environmental heterogeneity across geographic areas. To address these limitations, recent methods have shifted towards generating PA in ecological space rather than solely in geographic space.

Suggested Citation

  • Broussin, Joséphine & Mouchet, Maud & Goberville, Eric, 2024. "Generating pseudo-absences in the ecological space improves the biological relevance of response curves in species distribution models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 498(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:498:y:2024:i:c:s0304380024002539
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2024.110865
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380024002539
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2024.110865?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sillero, Neftalí & Arenas-Castro, Salvador & Enriquez‐Urzelai, Urtzi & Vale, Cândida Gomes & Sousa-Guedes, Diana & Martínez-Freiría, Fernando & Real, Raimundo & Barbosa, A.Márcia, 2021. "Want to model a species niche? A step-by-step guideline on correlative ecological niche modelling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 456(C).
    2. Hallgren, W. & Santana, F. & Low-Choy, S. & Zhao, Y. & Mackey, B., 2019. "Species distribution models can be highly sensitive to algorithm configuration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 408(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Marius Zumwald & Benedikt Knüsel & Christoph Baumberger & Gertrude Hirsch Hadorn & David N. Bresch & Reto Knutti, 2020. "Understanding and assessing uncertainty of observational climate datasets for model evaluation using ensembles," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(5), September.
    4. Iturbide, Maialen & Bedia, Joaquín & Herrera, Sixto & del Hierro, Oscar & Pinto, Miriam & Gutiérrez, Jose Manuel, 2015. "A framework for species distribution modelling with improved pseudo-absence generation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 312(C), pages 166-174.
    5. Whitford, Anna M. & Shipley, Benjamin R. & McGuire, Jenny L., 2024. "The influence of the number and distribution of background points in presence-background species distribution models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 488(C).
    6. Santika, Truly & Hutchinson, Michael F., 2009. "The effect of species response form on species distribution model prediction and inference," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(19), pages 2365-2379.
    7. Grimmett, Liam & Whitsed, Rachel & Horta, Ana, 2020. "Presence-only species distribution models are sensitive to sample prevalence: Evaluating models using spatial prediction stability and accuracy metrics," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 431(C).
    8. Stokland, Jogeir N. & Halvorsen, Rune & Støa, Bente, 2011. "Species distribution modelling—Effect of design and sample size of pseudo-absence observations," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(11), pages 1800-1809.
    9. Chefaoui, Rosa M. & Lobo, Jorge M., 2008. "Assessing the effects of pseudo-absences on predictive distribution model performance," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 210(4), pages 478-486.
    10. VanDerWal, Jeremy & Shoo, Luke P. & Graham, Catherine & Williams, Stephen E., 2009. "Selecting pseudo-absence data for presence-only distribution modeling: How far should you stray from what you know?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(4), pages 589-594.
    11. Giuseppe Jurman & Samantha Riccadonna & Cesare Furlanello, 2012. "A Comparison of MCC and CEN Error Measures in Multi-Class Prediction," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(8), pages 1-8, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Whitford, Anna M. & Shipley, Benjamin R. & McGuire, Jenny L., 2024. "The influence of the number and distribution of background points in presence-background species distribution models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 488(C).
    2. Marchetto, Elisa & Da Re, Daniele & Tordoni, Enrico & Bazzichetto, Manuele & Zannini, Piero & Celebrin, Simone & Chieffallo, Ludovico & Malavasi, Marco & Rocchini, Duccio, 2023. "Testing the effect of sample prevalence and sampling methods on probability- and favourability-based SDMs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 477(C).
    3. Coro, Gianpaolo & Pagano, Pasquale & Ellenbroek, Anton, 2013. "Combining simulated expert knowledge with Neural Networks to produce Ecological Niche Models for Latimeria chalumnae," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 268(C), pages 55-63.
    4. Sillero, Neftalí & Arenas-Castro, Salvador & Enriquez‐Urzelai, Urtzi & Vale, Cândida Gomes & Sousa-Guedes, Diana & Martínez-Freiría, Fernando & Real, Raimundo & Barbosa, A.Márcia, 2021. "Want to model a species niche? A step-by-step guideline on correlative ecological niche modelling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 456(C).
    5. Iturbide, Maialen & Bedia, Joaquín & Herrera, Sixto & del Hierro, Oscar & Pinto, Miriam & Gutiérrez, Jose Manuel, 2015. "A framework for species distribution modelling with improved pseudo-absence generation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 312(C), pages 166-174.
    6. Liang, Wanwan & Papeş, Monica & Tran, Liem & Grant, Jerome & Washington-Allen, Robert & Stewart, Scott & Wiggins, Gregory, 2018. "The effect of pseudo-absence selection method on transferability of species distribution models in the context of non-adaptive niche shift," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 388(C), pages 1-9.
    7. Steen, Bart & Broennimann, Olivier & Maiorano, Luigi & Guisan, Antoine, 2024. "How sensitive are species distribution models to different background point selection strategies? A test with species at various equilibrium levels," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 493(C).
    8. Barker, Justin R. & MacIsaac, Hugh J., 2022. "Species distribution models: Administrative boundary centroid occurrences require careful interpretation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 472(C).
    9. Rana, Divyashree & Sartor, Caroline Charão & Chiaverini, Luca & Cushman, Samuel Alan & Kaszta, Żaneta & Ramakrishnan, Uma & Macdonald, David W., 2024. "Differentially biased sampling strategies reveal the non-stationarity of species distribution models for Indian small felids," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 493(C).
    10. Schartel, Tyler E. & Cao, Yong, 2024. "Background selection complexity influences Maxent predictive performance in freshwater systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 488(C).
    11. Halvorsen, Rune & Mazzoni, Sabrina & Dirksen, John Wirkola & Næsset, Erik & Gobakken, Terje & Ohlson, Mikael, 2016. "How important are choice of model selection method and spatial autocorrelation of presence data for distribution modelling by MaxEnt?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 328(C), pages 108-118.
    12. Stokland, Jogeir N. & Halvorsen, Rune & Støa, Bente, 2011. "Species distribution modelling—Effect of design and sample size of pseudo-absence observations," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(11), pages 1800-1809.
    13. Domisch, Sami & Kuemmerlen, Mathias & Jähnig, Sonja C. & Haase, Peter, 2013. "Choice of study area and predictors affect habitat suitability projections, but not the performance of species distribution models of stream biota," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 257(C), pages 1-10.
    14. Grimmett, Liam & Whitsed, Rachel & Horta, Ana, 2020. "Presence-only species distribution models are sensitive to sample prevalence: Evaluating models using spatial prediction stability and accuracy metrics," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 431(C).
    15. Brice B Hanberry & Hong S He & Brian J Palik, 2012. "Pseudoabsence Generation Strategies for Species Distribution Models," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(8), pages 1-12, August.
    16. Senait D Senay & Susan P Worner & Takayoshi Ikeda, 2013. "Novel Three-Step Pseudo-Absence Selection Technique for Improved Species Distribution Modelling," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-16, August.
    17. Kuemmerlen, Mathias & Schmalz, Britta & Guse, Björn & Cai, Qinghua & Fohrer, Nicola & Jähnig, Sonja C., 2014. "Integrating catchment properties in small scale species distribution models of stream macroinvertebrates," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 277(C), pages 77-86.
    18. Hengl, Tomislav & Sierdsema, Henk & Radović, Andreja & Dilo, Arta, 2009. "Spatial prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence-only records: combining point pattern analysis, ENFA and regression-kriging," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(24), pages 3499-3511.
    19. Somaye Vaissi, 2021. "Design of Protected Area by Tracking and Excluding the Effects of Climate and Landscape Change: A Case Study Using Neurergus derjugini," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-20, May.
    20. Alsamadisi, Adam G. & Tran, Liem T. & Papeş, Monica, 2020. "Employing inferences across scales: Integrating spatial data with different resolutions to enhance Maxent models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 415(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:498:y:2024:i:c:s0304380024002539. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.