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 accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6 · Cited by 16,836
A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models
FIELDING, A. H., & BELL, J. F. (1997) · Environmental Conservation · doi:10.1017/s0376892997000088 · Cited by 6,956
A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists
Elith, J., Phillips, S. J., Hastie, T., Dudík, M., Chee, Y. E., & Yates, C. J. (2011) · Diversity and Distributions · doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00725.x · Cited by 6,699
Hutchinson, G. E. (1957) · Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · doi:10.1101/sqb.1957.022.01.039 · Cited by 6,228
Cross‐validation strategies for data with temporal, spatial, hierarchical, or phylogenetic structure
Roberts, D. R., Bahn, V., Ciuti, S., Boyce, M. S., Elith, J., Guillera‐Arroita, G., Hauenstein, S., Lahoz‐Monfort, J. J., Schröder, B., Thuiller, W., et al. (2017) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/ecog.02881 · Cited by 3,689
Novel climates, no‐analog communities, and ecological surprises
Williams, J. W., & Jackson, S. T. (2007) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/070037 · Cited by 1,736
Species Distribution Modeling and Ecological Niche Modeling: Getting the Concepts Right
Peterson, A. T., & Soberón, J. (2012) · Natureza & Conservação · doi:10.4322/natcon.2012.019 · Cited by 702
Self-citation
Cited by
Melo-Merino, S. M., Reyes-Bonilla, H., & Lira-Noriega, A. (2020) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2019.108837 · Cited by 555
Collinearity in ecological niche modeling: Confusions and challenges
Feng, X., Park, D. S., Liang, Y., Pandey, R., & Papeş, M. (2019) · Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1002/ece3.5555 · Cited by 438
Self-citationA checklist for maximizing reproducibility of ecological niche models
Feng, X., Park, D. S., Walker, C., Peterson, A. T., Merow, C., & Papeş, M. (2019) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-019-0972-5 · Cited by 323
Self-citationMedina Madariaga, G., Nguyen, H. H., Kiesel, J., Peters, K., Feld, C. K., Jaehnig, S. C., & Cambas, Y. T. (2024) · doi:10.1101/2024.05.28.596146 · Cited by 1
Medina-Madariaga, G., Nguyen, H. H., Kiesel, J., Peters, K., Feld, C. K., Jähnig, S. C., & Torres-Cambas, Y. (2025) · Ecological Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ecoinf.2025.103395 · Cited by 1
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.