Next Article in Journal
The Indian Ocean Dipole: A Missing Link between El Niño Modokiand Tropical Cyclone Intensity in the North Indian Ocean
Previous Article in Journal
Observed Spatiotemporal Trends in Intense Precipitation Events across United States: Applications for Stochastic Weather Generation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Relationship between East Asian Cold Surges and Synoptic Patterns: A New Coupling Framework
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Climate 2019, 7(3), 37; https://doi.org/10.3390/cli7030037

Not so Normal Normals: Species Distribution Model Results are Sensitive to Choice of Climate Normals and Model Type

1
U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA
2
Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 13 February 2019 / Accepted: 23 February 2019 / Published: 28 February 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Climate and Climate Niche Models)
Full-Text   |   PDF [1777 KB, uploaded 28 February 2019]   |  

Abstract

Species distribution models have many applications in conservation and ecology, and climate data are frequently a key driver of these models. Often, correlative modeling approaches are developed with readily available climate data; however, the impacts of the choice of climate normals is rarely considered. Here, we produced species distribution models for five disparate species using four different modeling algorithms and compared results between two different, but overlapping, climate normals time periods. Although the correlation structure among climate predictors did not change between the time periods, model results were sensitive to both baseline climate period and model method, even with model parameters specifically tuned to a species. Each species and each model type had at least one difference in variable retention or relative ranking with the change in climate time period. Pairwise comparisons of spatial predictions were also different, ranging from a low of 1.6% for climate period differences to a high of 25% for algorithm differences. While uncertainty from model algorithm selection is recognized as an important source of uncertainty, the impact of climate period is not commonly assessed. These uncertainties may affect conservation decisions, especially when projecting to future climates, and should be evaluated during model development. View Full-Text
Keywords: climate; correlative models; habitat suitability; software for assisted habitat modeling; uncertainty climate; correlative models; habitat suitability; software for assisted habitat modeling; uncertainty
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material

SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Jarnevich, C.S.; Young, N.E. Not so Normal Normals: Species Distribution Model Results are Sensitive to Choice of Climate Normals and Model Type. Climate 2019, 7, 37.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Climate EISSN 2225-1154 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top