Abstract
Species distribution modelling (SDM) is a family of statistical methods where species occurrence/density/richness are combined with environmental predictors to create predictive spatial models of species distribution. However, it often turns out that due to complex multi-level interactions between predictors and the response function, different types of models can detect different numbers of important predictors and also vary in their predictive ability. This is why we decided to explore differences in the predictive power of two most common methods, such as the Generalised Additive Model (GAM) and the Random Forest (RF) on the example of the Great Spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos major and the Great Grey Shrike Lanius excubitor, as well as on the taxonomic and functional species richness. For each of the two bird species’ densities and for two measurements of biodiversity, two sets of SDMs were generated: One based on the GAM, and the other on the RF. According to the out-of-bag, the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and an independent evaluation, we demonstrated that the GAM is the best method for predicting density of the Great Spotted Woodpecker and taxonomic species richness, whereas the RF has the lowest prediction error for the density of the Great Grey Shrike and functional species richness. It also becomes apparent that the GAM is responsive to taxonomic species richness and species with broad tolerance to environmental factors, i.e. the Great Spotted Woodpecker, while the RF detects more subtle relationships between density and environmental variables, rendering it more suitable for functional species richness and species with a narrow tolerance range to habitats factors, i.e. the Great Grey Shrike. Thus, effective predictive modelling of animal distribution requires considering several different analytical approaches to produce biologically realistic predictions.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Adam Mickiewicz University, Department of Avian Biology & Ecology, Faculty of Biology, Poznan, Poland (GRID:grid.5633.3) (ISNI:0000 0001 2097 3545)





