Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Mike Rees, N. Cressie (1993)
5. Statistics for Spatial DataJournal of The Royal Statistical Society Series A-statistics in Society, 156
H. Shaffer, Robert Fisher, Carlos Davidson (1998)
The role of natural history collections in documenting species declines.Trends in ecology & evolution, 13 1
Vicki Funk, K. Richardson (2002)
Systematic data in biodiversity studies: use it or lose it.Systematic biology, 51 2
(1996)
Biostatistical analysis
D. Stoms, F. Davis, Christopher Cogan (1992)
Sensitivity of wildlife habitat models to uncertainties in GIS dataPhotogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 58
J. Bart, M. Hofschen, B. Peterjohn (1995)
Reliability of the Breeding Bird Survey: Effects of restricting surveys to roadsThe Auk, 112
A. Hirzel, V. Helfer, F. Métral (2001)
Assessing habitat-suitability models with a virtual speciesEcological Modelling, 145
L. Bojórquez-Tapia, Ivan Azuara, E. Ezcurra, O. Flores-Villela (1995)
Identifying Conservation Priorities in Mexico Through Geographic Information Systems and ModelingEcological Applications, 5
R. Haining (1993)
Statistics for spatial data: by Noel Cressie, 1991, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 900 p., ISBN 0-471-84336-9, US $89.95Computers & Geosciences, 19
Dennis Dean, K. Wilson, C. Flather (1997)
Spatial Error Analysis of Species Richness for a Gap Analysis MapPhotogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 63
R. Anderson, D. Lew, A. Peterson (2003)
Evaluating predictive models of species’ distributions: criteria for selecting optimal modelsEcological Modelling, 162
G. White, R. Garrott (1986)
Effects of biotelemetry triangulation error on detecting habitat selectionJournal of Wildlife Management, 50
R. Kadmon, Oren Farber, A. Danin (2004)
EFFECT OF ROADSIDE BIAS ON THE ACCURACY OF PREDICTIVE MAPS PRODUCED BY BIOCLIMATIC MODELSEcological Applications, 14
H. Veregin (1989)
Taxonomy of Error in Spatial Databases (89-12)
Hugh Calkins, H. Onsrud, N. Obermeyer (1998)
NATIONAL CENTER FOR GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS
A. Zaniewski, A. Lehmann, J. Overton (2002)
Predicting species spatial distributions using presence-only data: a case study of native New Zealand fernsEcological Modelling, 157
J. Hoeting, M. Leecaster, D. Bowden (2000)
An Improved Model for Spatially Correlated Binary ResponsesJournal of Agricultural Biological and Environmental Statistics, 5
togrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing
D. MacKenzie, J. Nichols, Gideon Lachman, S. Droege, J. Royle, C. Langtimm (2002)
ESTIMATING SITE OCCUPANCY RATES WHEN DETECTION PROBABILITIES ARE LESS THAN ONEEcology, 83
M. Luoto, M. Kuussaari, T. Toivonen (2002)
Modelling butterfly distribution based on remote sensing dataJournal of Biogeography, 29
L. Janssen, F. Wel (1994)
Accuracy assessment of satellite derived land - cover data : a reviewPhotogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 60
A. Tyre, B. Tenhumberg, S. Field, D. Niejalke, K. Parris, H. Possingham (2003)
IMPROVING PRECISION AND REDUCING BIAS IN BIOLOGICAL SURVEYS: ESTIMATING FALSE‐NEGATIVE ERROR RATESEcological Applications, 13
M. Morrison (2001)
A Proposed Research Emphasis to Overcome the Limits of Wildlife-Habitat Relationship StudiesJournal of Wildlife Management, 65
C. Keller, Jacqueline Scallan (1999)
Potential roadside biases due to habitat changes along Breeding Bird Survey routesThe Condor, 101
A. Fielding, J. Bell (1997)
A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence modelsEnvironmental Conservation, 24
M. Fortin, P. Drapeau, P. Legendre (1989)
Spatial autocorrelation and sampling design in plant ecologyVegetatio, 83
Sushma Reddy, L. Dávalos (2003)
Geographical sampling bias and its implications for conservation priorities in AfricaJournal of Biogeography, 30
David Stockwell, A. Peterson (2002)
Effects of sample size on accuracy of species distribution modelsEcological Modelling, 148
F. Corsi, E. Dupré, L. Boitani (1999)
A Large‐Scale Model of Wolf Distribution in Italy for Conservation PlanningConservation Biology, 13
A. Hirzel, A. Guisan (2002)
Which is the optimal sampling strategy for habitat suitability modellingEcological Modelling, 157
S. Pathirana (1999)
Distribution of Errors in a Classified Map of Satellite DataGeocarto International, 14
J. Edwards, M. Lane, E. Nielsen (2000)
Interoperability of biodiversity databases: biodiversity information on every desktop.Science, 289 5488
(1984)
Biostatistique. Gatan Morin Editeur
A. Hirzel, J. Hausser, D. Chessel, N. Perrin (2002)
ECOLOGICAL-NICHE FACTOR ANALYSIS: HOW TO COMPUTE HABITAT-SUITABILITY MAPS WITHOUT ABSENCE DATA?Ecology, 83
J. Hanowski, G. Niemi (1995)
A comparison of on- and off-road bird counts: Do you need to go off road to count birds accurately?Journal of Field Ornithology, 66
B. Garrison, M. Patten, I. Timossi (2000)
Accuracy of wildlife model predictions for bird species occurrences in California counties Barr~tt A. Gr~rri.sorz, Rictzur~l A. Erickson. ,llichnc~l A. Prctterz, nrzd Irene C. Tinzossi
David Stockwell, I. Noble (1992)
Induction of sets of rules from animal distribution data: a robust and informative method of data analysisMathematics and Computers in Simulation, 33
J. Pearce, S. Ferrier (2000)
Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regressionEcological Modelling, 133
N. Augustin, M. Mugglestone, S. Buckland (1996)
An autologistic model for the spatial distribution of wildlifeJournal of Applied Ecology, 33
Geospatial species sample data (e.g., records with location information from natural history museums or annual surveys) are rarely collected optimally, yet are increasingly used for decisions concerning our biological heritage. Using computer simulations, we examined factors that could affect the performance of autologistic regression (ALR) models that predict species occurrence based on environmental variables and spatially correlated presence/absence data. We used a factorial experiment design to examine the effects of survey design, spatial contiguity, and species detection probability and applied the results of ten replications of each factorial combination to an ALR model. We used additional simulations to assess the effects of sample size and environmental data error on model performance. Predicted distribution maps were compared to simulated distribution maps, considered ““truth,”” and evaluated using several metrics: omission and commission error counts, residual sums of squares (RSS), and areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Generally, model performance was better using random and stratified survey designs than when using other designs. Adaptive survey designs were an exception to this generalization under the omission error performance criterion. Surveys using rectangular quadrats, designed to emulate roadside surveys, resulted in models with better performance than those using square quadrats (using AUC, RSS, and omission error metrics) and were most similar in performance to a systematic quadrat design. Larger detection probabilities, larger sample sizes, contiguous distributions, and fewer environmental data errors generally improved model performance. Results suggest that spatially biased sample data, e.g., data collected along roads, could result in model performance near that of systematic quadrat designs even in the presence of potentially confounding factors such as contiguity of distributions, detection probability, sample size, and environmental data error.
Ecological Applications – Ecological Society of America
Published: Apr 1, 2005
Keywords: autologistic regression model ; detection probability ; environmental data error ; habitat relationship modeling ; prediction accuracy assessment ; roadside survey ; sample data ; sample size ; sampling bias ; spatial contiguity ; species range
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.