UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Evaluating Bayesian spatial methods for modelling species distributions with clumped and restricted occurrence data

Redding, DW; Lucas, TCD; Blackburn, TM; Jones, KE; (2017) Evaluating Bayesian spatial methods for modelling species distributions with clumped and restricted occurrence data. PLOS ONE , 12 (11) , Article e0187602. 10.1371/journal.pone.0187602. Green open access

[thumbnail of Evaluating Bayesian spatial methods for modelling species distributions with clumped and restricted occurrence data.pdf]
Preview
Text
Evaluating Bayesian spatial methods for modelling species distributions with clumped and restricted occurrence data.pdf - Published Version

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Statistical approaches for inferring the spatial distribution of taxa (Species Distribution Models, SDMs) commonly rely on available occurrence data, which is often clumped and geographically restricted. Although available SDM methods address some of these factors, they could be more directly and accurately modelled using a spatially-explicit approach. Software to fit models with spatial autocorrelation parameters in SDMs are now widely available, but whether such approaches for inferring SDMs aid predictions compared to other methodologies is unknown. Here, within a simulated environment using 1000 generated species’ ranges, we compared the performance of two commonly used non-spatial SDM methods (Maximum Entropy Modelling, MAXENT and boosted regression trees, BRT), to a spatial Bayesian SDM method (fitted using R-INLA), when the underlying data exhibit varying combinations of clumping and geographic restriction. Finally, we tested how any recommended methodological settings designed to account for spatially non-random patterns in the data impact inference. Spatial Bayesian SDM method was the most consistently accurate method, being in the top 2 most accurate methods in 7 out of 8 data sampling scenarios. Within high-coverage sample datasets, all methods performed fairly similarly. When sampling points were randomly spread, BRT had a 1–3% greater accuracy over the other methods and when samples were clumped, the spatial Bayesian SDM method had a 4%-8% better AUC score. Alternatively, when sampling points were restricted to a small section of the true range all methods were on average 10–12% less accurate, with greater variation among the methods. Model inference under the recommended settings to account for autocorrelation was not impacted by clumping or restriction of data, except for the complexity of the spatial regression term in the spatial Bayesian model. Methods, such as those made available by R-INLA, can be successfully used to account for spatial autocorrelation in an SDM context and, by taking account of random effects, produce outputs that can better elucidate the role of covariates in predicting species occurrence. Given that it is often unclear what the drivers are behind data clumping in an empirical occurrence dataset, or indeed how geographically restricted these data are, spatially-explicit Bayesian SDMs may be the better choice when modelling the spatial distribution of target species.

Type: Article
Title: Evaluating Bayesian spatial methods for modelling species distributions with clumped and restricted occurrence data
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187602
Publisher version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187602
Language: English
Additional information: Copyright © 2017 Redding et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Keywords: Decision trees, Spatial autocorrelation, Statistical distributions, Geographic distribution, Simulation and modeling, Species interactions, Spatial and landscape ecology, Theoretical ecology
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Life Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Life Sciences > Div of Biosciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Life Sciences > Div of Biosciences > Genetics, Evolution and Environment
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10038262
Downloads since deposit
92Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item