Cited by 6,699Species Distribution and Climate ChangeEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesWildlife Ecology and Conservation

A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists

Open access
Elith, Jane, Phillips, Steven J., Hastie, Trevor, Dudík, Miroslav, Chee, Yung En, Yates, Colin J.·2011·Diversity and Distributions

Abstract

MaxEnt is a program for modelling species distributions from presence-only species records. This paper is written for ecologists and describes the MaxEnt model from a statistical perspective, making explicit links between the structure of the model, decisions required in producing a modelled distribution, and knowledge about the species and the data that might affect those decisions. To begin we discuss the characteristics of presence-only data, highlighting implications for modelling distributions. We particularly focus on the problems of sample bias and lack of information on species prevalence. The keystone of the paper is a new statistical explanation of MaxEnt which shows that the model minimizes the relative entropy between two probability densities (one estimated from the presence data and one, from the landscape) defined in covariate space. For many users, this viewpoint is likely to be a more accessible way to understand the model than previous ones that rely on machine learning concepts. We then step through a detailed explanation of MaxEnt describing key components (e.g. covariates and features, and definition of the landscape extent), the mechanics of model fitting (e.g. feature selection, constraints and regularization) and outputs. Using case studies for a Banksia species native to south-west Australia and a riverine fish, we fit models and interpret them, exploring why certain choices affect the result and what this means. The fish example illustrates use of the model with vector data for linear river segments rather than raster (gridded) data. Appropriate treatments for survey bias, unprojected data, locally restricted species, and predicting to environments outside the range of the training data are demonstrated, and new capabilities discussed. Online appendices include additional details of the model and the mathematical links between previous explanations and this one, example code and data, and further information on the case studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00725.x

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Elith, J., Phillips, S. J., Hastie, T., Dudík, M., Chee, Y. E., & Yates, C. J.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • AT&T (United States) (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Government of Western Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Elith, Jane
Venue
Diversity and Distributions
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-11-25
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
43-57
ISSN
  • 0967-9952 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-9516
OpenAlex
W1568201516
Cited by
6,699
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 468 · 2025: 627 · 2024: 554 · 2023: 583 · 2022: 610 · 2021: 548 · 2020: 516 · 2019: 435 · 2018: 430 · 2017: 381 · 2016: 359 · 2015: 301 · 2014: 350 · 2013: 268 · 2012: 198
FWCI
101.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Diversity and Distributions (publishedVersion)
Funders
Australian Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecological Modeling › Species Distribution and Climate Change
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
MaxEnt, species distribution modeling, presence-only data, Kullback-Leibler divergence, sampling bias, species prevalence, feature selection, regularization, survey bias, Banksia, riverine fish, vector data

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