Перейти к основному содержанию
AkademIndex

Продукты

Для разработчиков

AkademBaseОткрытый API экосистемы
Обзорная статья

Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments

Miguel B. AraújoCenter for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, DK-2100 Copenhagen, DenmarkRobert P. AndersonDepartment of Biology, City College of New York, New York, NY 10031, USAA. Márcia BarbosaRui Nabeiro Biodiversity Chair, University of Évora, 7000 Évora, PortugalColin M. BealeDepartment of Biology, University of York, York YO19 5PR, UKCarsten F. DormannBiometry and Environmental System Analysis, University of Freiburg, D-79106 Freiburg, GermanyRegan EarlyCentre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn, Cornwall TR10 9FE, UKRaquel A. GarciaCenter for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, DK-2100 Copenhagen, DenmarkAntoine GuisanDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, SwitzerlandLuigi MaioranoDepartment of Biology and Biotechnologies Charles Darwin, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, ItalyBabak NaimiCenter for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, DK-2100 Copenhagen, DenmarkRobert B. O’HaraLandscape Dynamics, Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Birmensdorf, SwitzerlandNiklaus E. ZimmermannDepartment of Mathematical Sciences and Centre for Biodiversity Dynamics, NTNU, 7491 Trondheim, NorwayCarsten RahbekCenter for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
2019en
ABI

Аннотация

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.

Перевод пока недоступен

Идентификаторы

Цитирования и источники

Цитирований: 3Использованных источников: 0