The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Modelling ecological niches from low numbers of occurrences: assessment of the conservation status of poorly known viverrids (Mammalia, Carnivora) across two continents
Open accessAbstract
The conservation of poorly known species is difficult because of incomplete knowledge on their biology and distribution. We studied the contribution of two ecological niche modelling tools, the Genetic Algorithm for Rule‐set Prediction (GARP) and maximum entropy (Maxent), in assessing potential ranges and distributional connectivity among 12 of the least known African and Asian viverrids. The level of agreement between GARP and Maxent predictions was low when < 15 occurrences were available, probably indicating a minimum number below that necessary to obtain models with good predictive power. Unexpectedly, our results suggested that Maxent extrapolated more than GARP in the context of small sample sizes. Predictions were overlapped with current land use and location of protected areas to estimate the conservation status of each species. Our analyses yielded range predictions generally contradicting with extents of occurrence established by the IUCN. We evidenced a high level of disturbance within predicted distributions in West and East Africa, Sumatra, and South‐East Asia, and identified within West African degraded lowlands four relatively preserved areas that might be of prime importance for the conservation of rainforest taxa. Knowing whether these species of viverrids may survive in degraded or alternative habitats is of crucial importance for further conservation planning. The level of coverage of species suitable ranges by existing and proposed IUCN reserves was low, and we recommend that the total surface of protected areas be substantially increased on both continents.
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
Cited by
ENVIRONMENTAL NICHE EQUIVALENCY VERSUS CONSERVATISM: QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES TO NICHE EVOLUTION
Warren, D. L., Glor, R. E., & Turelli, M. (2008) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00482.x · Cited by 2,663
Selecting thresholds for the prediction of species occurrence with presence‐only data
Liu, C., White, M., & Newell, G. (2013) · Journal of Biogeography · doi:10.1111/jbi.12058 · Cited by 1,613
Niches and distributional areas: Concepts, methods, and assumptions
Soberón, J., & Nakamura, M. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0901637106 · Cited by 1,306
Shcheglovitova, M., & Anderson, R. P. (2013) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.08.011 · Cited by 631
Want to model a species niche? A step-by-step guideline on correlative ecological niche modelling
Sillero, N., Arenas-Castro, S., Enriquez‐Urzelai, U., Vale, C. G., Sousa-Guedes, D., Martínez-Freiría, F., Real, R., & Barbosa, A. M. (2021) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109671 · Cited by 456
Metadata
- Authors
- Papeş, M., & Gaubert, P.
- Venue
- Diversity and Distributions
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-07-03
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 890-902
- ISSN
- 0967-9952 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-9516
- 1472-4642
- OpenAlex
- W1856507905
- Cited by
- 309
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.41
- 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: Modelling ecological niches from low numbers of occurrences: assessment of the conservation status of poorly known viverrids (Mammalia, Carnivora) across two continents. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00392.x
- The paper
- Papeş, M., & Gaubert, P. (2007). Modelling ecological niches from low numbers of occurrences: assessment of the conservation status of poorly known viverrids (Mammalia, Carnivora) across two continents. Diversity and Distributions. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2007.00392.x
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.