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
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.
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
Species richness, hotspots, and the scale dependence of range maps in ecology and conservation
Hurlbert, A. H., & Jetz, W. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0704469104 · Cited by 710
Self-citation
Cited by
Classifying drivers of global forest loss
Curtis, P. G., Slay, C. M., Harris, N. L., Tyukavina, A., & Hansen, M. C. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aau3445 · Cited by 2,340
Global hotspots and correlates of emerging zoonotic diseases
Allen, T., Murray, K. A., Zambrana-Torrelio, C., Morse, S. S., Rondinini, C., Di Marco, M., Breit, N., Olival, K. J., & Daszak, P. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00923-8 · Cited by 1,124
Mapping tree density at a global scale
Crowther, T. W., Glick, H. B., Covey, K. R., Bettigole, C., Maynard, D. S., Thomas, S. M., Smith, J. R., Hintler, G., Duguid, M. C., Amatulli, G., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14967 · Cited by 1,002
Self-citationA global meta-analysis on the ecological drivers of forest restoration success
Crouzeilles, R., Curran, M., Ferreira, M. S., Lindenmayer, D. B., Grelle, C. E. V., & Rey Benayas, J. M. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms11666 · Cited by 652
Tuanmu, M., & Jetz, W. (2015) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/geb.12365 · Cited by 331
Self-citation
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.