Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 199

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An evaluation of transferability of ecological niche models

Open access
Qiao, Huijie, Feng, Xiao, Escobar, Luis E., Peterson, A. Townsend, Soberón, Jorge, Zhu, Gengping, Papeş, Monica·2019·Ecography

Abstract

Ecological niche modeling (ENM) is used widely to study species’ geographic distributions. ENM applications frequently involve transferring models calibrated with environmental data from one region to other regions or times that may include novel environmental conditions. When novel conditions are present, transferability implies extrapolation, whereas, in absence of such conditions, transferability is an interpolation step only. We evaluated transferability of models produced using 11 ENM algorithms from the perspective of interpolation and extrapolation in a virtual species framework. We defined fundamental niches and potential distributions of 16 virtual species distributed across Eurasia. To simulate real situations of incomplete understanding of species’ distribution or existing fundamental niche (environmental conditions suitable for the species contained in the study area; N* F ), we divided Eurasia into six regions and used 1–5 regions for model calibration and the rest for model evaluation. The models produced with the 11 ENM algorithms were evaluated in environmental space, to complement the traditional geographic evaluation of models. None of the algorithms accurately estimated the existing fundamental niche (N* F ) given one region in calibration, and model evaluation scores decreased as the novelty of the environments in the evaluation regions increased. Thus, we recommend quantifying environmental similarity between calibration and transfer regions prior to model transfer, providing an avenue for assessing uncertainty of model transferability. Different algorithms had different sensitivity to completeness of knowledge of N* F , with implications for algorithm selection. If the goal is to reconstruct fundamental niches, users should choose algorithms with limited extrapolation when N* F is well known, or choose algorithms with increased extrapolation when N* F is poorly known. Our assessment can inform applications of ecological niche modeling transference to anticipate species invasions into novel areas, disease emergence in new regions, and forecasts of species distributions under future climate conditions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ecog.03986

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 199

Metadata

Authors
Qiao, H., Feng, X., Escobar, L. E., Peterson, A. T., Soberón, J., Zhu, G., & Papeş, M.
Venue
Ecography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-10-16
Volume
42
Issue
3
Pages
521-534
ISSN
  • 0906-7590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0587
OpenAlex
W2886737893
Cited by
199
References
7
FWCI
12.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An evaluation of transferability of ecological niche models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/ecog.03986
The paper
Qiao, H., Feng, X., Escobar, L. E., Peterson, A. T., Soberón, J., Zhu, G., & Papeş, M. (2019). An evaluation of transferability of ecological niche models. Ecography. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.03986

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.