Literature DB >> 18560928

Modeling animal habitats based on cover types: a critical review.

Scott Schlossberg1, David I King.   

Abstract

The simplest type of model describing animal habitats is a "cover-type model," in which a species is assumed to be present in certain vegetation types and absent in others. Ecologists and managers use these models to predict animal distributions for gap analysis and conservation planning. Critics, however, have suggested that the models are overly simplistic and inaccurate. We reviewed the use of cover-type models including assessing their error rates, diagnosing the problems with these models, and determining how they should best be used by managers. To determine models' accuracy rates, we conducted a meta-analysis of 35 studies in which cover-type models were tested against data on animal occurrences. Models had a mean accuracy rate of 0.71 +/- 0.18 (SD). Rates of commission error averaged 0.20 +/- 0.16, and omission errors averaged 0.09 +/- 0.11. A review of the effects of errors in conservation planning suggests that the observed error rates were high enough to call into question any management decisions based on these models. Reasons for the high error rates of cover-type models include the fallibility of expert opinion, the fact that the models oversimplify how animals actually use habitats, and the dynamic nature of animal populations. Given the high rate of errors in cover-type models, any conclusions based on them should be taken with extreme caution. We suggest that these models are best used as coarse filters to identify locations for further study in the field.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18560928     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-008-9159-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  7 in total

Review 1.  Systematic conservation planning.

Authors:  C R Margules; R L Pressey
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-05-11       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  The buffer effect and large-scale population regulation in migratory birds.

Authors:  J A Gill; K Norris; P M Potts; T G Gunnarsson; P W Atkinson; W J Sutherland
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2001-07-26       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 3.  Tradeoffs of different types of species occurrence data for use in systematic conservation planning.

Authors:  Carlo Rondinini; Kerrie A Wilson; Luigi Boitani; Hedley Grantham; Hugh P Possingham
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 9.492

4.  Some methodological issues in macroecology.

Authors:  T M Blackburn; K J Gaston
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 3.926

5.  Incomplete Data Sets in Community Ecology and Biogeography: A Cautionary Tale.

Authors:  Astrid Kodric-Brown; James H Brown
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 4.657

6.  Population declines in North American birds that migrate to the neotropics.

Authors:  C S Robbins; J R Sauer; R S Greenberg; S Droege
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Projected impacts of climate and land-use change on the global diversity of birds.

Authors:  Walter Jetz; David S Wilcove; Andrew P Dobson
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 8.029

  7 in total
  2 in total

1.  Effects of species ecology and urbanization on accuracy of a cover-type model: A test using GAP analysis.

Authors:  Christopher J W McClure; Laura K Estep; Geoffrey E Hill
Journal:  Landsc Urban Plan       Date:  2012-02-13       Impact factor: 6.142

2.  Microhabitat selection by three common bird species of montane farmlands in Northern Greece.

Authors:  Rigas Tsiakiris; Kalliopi Stara; John Pantis; Stefanos Sgardelis
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 3.266

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.