Cargando…

MaxEnt brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; Model parameterization of four species distribution models

Species distribution models (SDMs) are practical tools to assess the habitat suitability of species with numerous applications in environmental management and conservation planning. The manipulation of the input data to deal with their spatial bias is one of the advantageous methods to enhance the p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ahmadi, Mohsen, Hemami, Mahmoud‐Reza, Kaboli, Mohammad, Shabani, Farzin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9937880/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820245
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9827
_version_ 1784890522841645056
author Ahmadi, Mohsen
Hemami, Mahmoud‐Reza
Kaboli, Mohammad
Shabani, Farzin
author_facet Ahmadi, Mohsen
Hemami, Mahmoud‐Reza
Kaboli, Mohammad
Shabani, Farzin
author_sort Ahmadi, Mohsen
collection PubMed
description Species distribution models (SDMs) are practical tools to assess the habitat suitability of species with numerous applications in environmental management and conservation planning. The manipulation of the input data to deal with their spatial bias is one of the advantageous methods to enhance the performance of SDMs. However, the development of a model parameterization approach covering different SDMs to achieve well‐performing models has rarely been implemented. We integrated input data manipulation and model tuning for four commonly‐used SDMs: generalized linear model (GLM), gradient boosted model (GBM), random forest (RF), and maximum entropy (MaxEnt), and compared their predictive performance to model geographically imbalanced‐biased data of a rare species complex of mountain vipers. Models were tuned up based on a range of model‐specific parameters considering two background selection methods: random and background weighting schemes. The performance of the fine‐tuned models was assessed based on recently identified localities of the species. The results indicated that although the fine‐tuned version of all models shows great performance in predicting training data (AUC > 0.9 and TSS > 0.5), they produce different results in classifying out‐of‐bag data. The GBM and RF with higher sensitivity of training data showed more different performances. The GLM, despite having high predictive performance for test data, showed lower specificity. It was only the MaxEnt model that showed high predictive performance and comparable results for identifying test data in both random and background weighting procedures. Our results highlight that while GBM and RF are prone to overfitting training data and GLM over‐predict nonsampled areas MaxEnt is capable of producing results that are both predictable (extrapolative) and complex (interpolative). We discuss the assumptions of each model and conclude that MaxEnt could be considered as a practical method to cope with imbalanced‐biased data in species distribution modeling approaches.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9937880
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99378802023-02-19 MaxEnt brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; Model parameterization of four species distribution models Ahmadi, Mohsen Hemami, Mahmoud‐Reza Kaboli, Mohammad Shabani, Farzin Ecol Evol Research Articles Species distribution models (SDMs) are practical tools to assess the habitat suitability of species with numerous applications in environmental management and conservation planning. The manipulation of the input data to deal with their spatial bias is one of the advantageous methods to enhance the performance of SDMs. However, the development of a model parameterization approach covering different SDMs to achieve well‐performing models has rarely been implemented. We integrated input data manipulation and model tuning for four commonly‐used SDMs: generalized linear model (GLM), gradient boosted model (GBM), random forest (RF), and maximum entropy (MaxEnt), and compared their predictive performance to model geographically imbalanced‐biased data of a rare species complex of mountain vipers. Models were tuned up based on a range of model‐specific parameters considering two background selection methods: random and background weighting schemes. The performance of the fine‐tuned models was assessed based on recently identified localities of the species. The results indicated that although the fine‐tuned version of all models shows great performance in predicting training data (AUC > 0.9 and TSS > 0.5), they produce different results in classifying out‐of‐bag data. The GBM and RF with higher sensitivity of training data showed more different performances. The GLM, despite having high predictive performance for test data, showed lower specificity. It was only the MaxEnt model that showed high predictive performance and comparable results for identifying test data in both random and background weighting procedures. Our results highlight that while GBM and RF are prone to overfitting training data and GLM over‐predict nonsampled areas MaxEnt is capable of producing results that are both predictable (extrapolative) and complex (interpolative). We discuss the assumptions of each model and conclude that MaxEnt could be considered as a practical method to cope with imbalanced‐biased data in species distribution modeling approaches. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-02-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9937880/ /pubmed/36820245 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9827 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Ahmadi, Mohsen
Hemami, Mahmoud‐Reza
Kaboli, Mohammad
Shabani, Farzin
MaxEnt brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; Model parameterization of four species distribution models
title MaxEnt brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; Model parameterization of four species distribution models
title_full MaxEnt brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; Model parameterization of four species distribution models
title_fullStr MaxEnt brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; Model parameterization of four species distribution models
title_full_unstemmed MaxEnt brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; Model parameterization of four species distribution models
title_short MaxEnt brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; Model parameterization of four species distribution models
title_sort maxent brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; model parameterization of four species distribution models
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9937880/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820245
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9827
work_keys_str_mv AT ahmadimohsen maxentbringscomparableresultswhentheinputdataarebeingcompletedmodelparameterizationoffourspeciesdistributionmodels
AT hemamimahmoudreza maxentbringscomparableresultswhentheinputdataarebeingcompletedmodelparameterizationoffourspeciesdistributionmodels
AT kabolimohammad maxentbringscomparableresultswhentheinputdataarebeingcompletedmodelparameterizationoffourspeciesdistributionmodels
AT shabanifarzin maxentbringscomparableresultswhentheinputdataarebeingcompletedmodelparameterizationoffourspeciesdistributionmodels