Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 511

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A global 1‐km consensus land‐cover product for biodiversity and ecosystem modelling

Tuanmu, Mao‐Ning, Jetz, Walter·2014·Global Ecology and Biogeography

Abstract

Aim: For many applications in biodiversity and ecology, existing remote sensing‐derived land‐cover products have limitations due to among‐product inconsistency and their typically non‐continuous nature. Here we aim to help address these shortcomings by generating a 1‐km resolution global product that provides scale‐integrated and accuracy‐weighted consensus land‐cover information on an approximately continuous scale. Location: Global. Methods: Using a generalized classification scheme and an accuracy‐based integration approach, we integrated four global land‐cover products. We evaluated the performance of this product compared with inputs for estimating subpixel 30‐m resolution land cover. We also compared the accuracy of deductive and inductive species distribution models built with the different products for modelling the continental distributions of six avian habitat specialists. Results: Our product offers accuracy‐weighted consensus information on the prevalence of 12 land‐cover classes within every nominal 1‐km pixel across the globe (except for A ntarctica). Compared with the four base products, it better captures the land‐cover information contained in the fine‐grain validation data for all classes combined and for most individual classes. It also has the highest sensitivity and overall accuracy for detecting the presence of every fine‐grain land‐cover class. Both deductive and inductive models built with the consensus dataset have the highest or second highest accuracy for modelling bird species distributions. Main conclusions: Our consensus product integrates the four base products and successfully maximizes accuracy and reduces errors of omission. Specifically, the consensus product reduces limitations caused by misclassifications, false absence rates and the categorical format of existing land‐cover products. Consequently, it surpasses single base products in the ability to capture subpixel land‐cover information and the utility for modelling species distributions. Both the presented methodology and the consensus product have multiple applications in biodiversity research and for understanding and modelling of global terrestrial ecosystems.

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/geb.12182

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 511

Metadata

Authors
Tuanmu, M., & Jetz, W.
Venue
Global Ecology and Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-04-24
Volume
23
Issue
9
Pages
1031-1045
ISSN
  • 1466-822X (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-8238
OpenAlex
W2137133843
Cited by
511
References
1
FWCI
37.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.