Back
Full-text
Journal article

Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments.

  • Araújo MB National Museum of Natural Sciences, Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), 28006 Madrid, Spain.
  • Anderson RP Department of Biology, City College of New York, New York, NY 10031, USA.
  • Márcia Barbosa A Rui Nabeiro Biodiversity Chair, University of Évora, 7000 Évora, Portugal.
  • Beale CM Department of Biology, University of York, York YO19 5PR, UK.
  • Dormann CF Biometry and Environmental System Analysis, University of Freiburg, D-79106 Freiburg, Germany.
  • Early R Centre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9FE, UK.
  • Garcia RA Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
  • Guisan A Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
  • Maiorano L Department of Biology and Biotechnologies Charles Darwin, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy.
  • Naimi B Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
  • O'Hara RB Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Senckenberganlage 25, 60325 Frankfurt, Germany.
  • Zimmermann NE Department of Mathematical Sciences and Centre for Biodiversity Dynamics, NTNU, 7491 Trondheim, Norway.
  • Rahbek C Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Show more…
  • 2019-02-13
Published in:
  • Science advances. - 2019
Biodiversity
Environmental Monitoring
Guidelines as Topic
Models, Theoretical
Peer Review
Spatio-Temporal Analysis
English Demand for models in biodiversity assessments is rising, but which models are adequate for the task? We propose a set of best-practice standards and detailed guidelines enabling scoring of studies based on species distribution models for use in biodiversity assessments. We reviewed and scored 400 modeling studies over the past 20 years using the proposed standards and guidelines. We detected low model adequacy overall, but with a marked tendency of improvement over time in model building and, to a lesser degree, in biological data and model evaluation. We argue that implementation of agreed-upon standards for models in biodiversity assessments would promote transparency and repeatability, eventually leading to higher quality of the models and the inferences used in assessments. We encourage broad community participation toward the expansion and ongoing development of the proposed standards and guidelines.
Language
  • English
Open access status
gold
Identifiers
Persistent URL
https://sonar.ch/global/documents/277860
Statistics
Document views: 122 File downloads:
  • Full-text: 0