Cited by 656Species Distribution and Climate ChangeEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesScarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and Biogeography

The uncertain nature of absences and their importance in species distribution modelling

Lobo, Jorge M., Jiménez‐Valverde, Alberto, Hortal, Joaquín·2010·Ecography

Abstract

Species distribution models (SDM) are commonly used to obtain hypotheses on either the realized or the potential distribution of species. The reliability and meaning of these hypotheses depends on the kind of absences included in the training data, the variables used as predictors and the methods employed to parameterize the models. Information about the absence of species from certain localities is usually lacking, so pseudo‐absences are often incorporated to the training data. We explore the effect of using different kinds of pseudo‐absences on SDM results. To do this, we use presence information on Aphodius bonvouloiri , a dung beetle species of well‐known distribution. We incorporate different types of pseudo‐absences to create different sets of training data that account for absences of methodological (i.e. false absences), contingent and environmental origin. We used these datasets to calibrate SDMs with GAMs as modelling technique and climatic variables as predictors, and compare these results with geographical representations of the potential and realized distribution of the species created independently. Our results confirm the importance of the kind of absences in determining the aspect of species distribution identified through SDM. Estimations of the potential distribution require absences located farther apart in the geographic and/or environmental space than estimations of the realized distribution. Methodological absences produce overall bad models, and absences that are too far from the presence points in either the environmental or the geographic space may not be informative, yielding important overestimations. GLMs and Artificial Neural Networks yielded similar results. Synthetic discrimination measures such as the Area Under the Receiver Characteristic Curve (AUC) must be interpreted with caution, as they can produce misleading comparative results. Instead, the joint examination of ommission and comission errors provides a better understanding of the reliability of SDM results.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.06039.x

Cites

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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Using a combined method to generate background points reduces potential model overestimation of environmental suitability in regions of greater occurrence point densities.

    “Using a combined method to generate background points reduces potential model overestimation of environmental suitability that typically arises in regions of greater occurrence point densities, usually in more easily sampled areas ( i.e. , spatial bias), and which random background point generation by itself does not consider (Lobo et al., 2010; Kramer-Schadt et al., 2013).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lobo, J. M., Jiménez‐Valverde, A., & Hortal, J.
Affiliations
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
Venue
Ecography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-02
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
103-114
ISSN
  • 0906-7590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0587
OpenAlex
W2082076621
Cited by
656
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 40
FWCI
24.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ecography (publishedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
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 › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Scarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and Biogeography
Keywords
species distribution modeling, pseudo-absences, absence data, dung beetles, potential distribution, false absences, generalized additive models, omission and commission errors, model calibration, climate predictors

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