Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorVollering, Julien Martin Marie
dc.contributor.authorHalvorsen, Rune
dc.contributor.authorAuestad, Inger
dc.contributor.authorRydgren, Knut
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-26T07:40:42Z
dc.date.available2019-09-26T07:40:42Z
dc.date.created2019-08-15T14:35:07Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.citationVollering, J., Halvorsen, R., Auestad, I., & Rydgren, K. (2019). Bunching up the background betters bias in species distribution models. Ecography.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn0906-7590
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2618861
dc.description.abstractSets of presence records used to model species’ distributions typically consist of observations collected opportunistically rather than systematically. As a result, sampling probability is geographically uneven, which may confound the model's characterization of the species’ distribution. Modelers frequently address sampling bias by manipulating training data: either subsampling presence data or creating a similar spatial bias in non‐presence background data. We tested a new method, which we call ‘background thickening’, in the latter category. Background thickening entails concentrating background locations around presence locations in proportion to presence location density. We compared background thickening to two established sampling bias correction methods – target group background selection and presence thinning – using simulated data and data from a case study. In the case study, background thickening and presence thinning performed similarly well, both producing better model discrimination than target group background selection, and better model calibration than models without correction. In the simulation, background thickening performed better than presence thinning when the number of simulated presence locations was low, and vice versa. We discuss drawbacks to target group background selection, why background thickening and presence thinning are conservative but robust sampling bias correction methods, and why background thickening is better than presence thinning for small sample sizes. Particularly, background thickening is advantageous for treating sampling bias when data are scarce because it avoids discarding presence records.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherWileynb_NO
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.subjectbias correctionnb_NO
dc.subjectMaxentnb_NO
dc.subjectpresence-background modelingnb_NO
dc.subjectpresence thinningnb_NO
dc.subjectsampling biasnb_NO
dc.subjectspecies distribution modelnb_NO
dc.subjecttarget group background selectionnb_NO
dc.subjectvirtual speciesnb_NO
dc.titleBunching up the background betters bias in species distribution modelsnb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.rights.holder© 2019 The Authors.nb_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Zoologiske og botaniske fag: 480::Plantegeografi: 496nb_NO
dc.source.journalEcographynb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/ecog.04503
dc.identifier.cristin1716192
cristin.unitcode203,12,7,0
cristin.unitnameInstitutt for miljø- og naturvitskap
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode2


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal