Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,613

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Selecting thresholds for the prediction of species occurrence with presence‐only data

Liu, Canran, White, Matt, Newell, Graeme·2013·Journal of Biogeography

Abstract

Aim: Species distribution models have been widely used to tackle ecological, evolutionary and conservation problems. Most species distribution modelling techniques produce continuous suitability predictions, but many real applications (e.g. reserve design, species invasion and climate change impact assessment) and model evaluations require binary outputs, and thresholds are needed for these transformations. Although there are many threshold selection methods for presence/absence data, it is unclear whether these are suitable for presence‐only data. In this paper, we investigate mathematically and empirically which of the existing threshold selection methods can be used confidently with presence‐only data. Location: We used real spatially explicit environmental data derived from the western part of the state of V ictoria, south‐eastern A ustralia, and simulated species distributions within this area. Methods: Thirteen existing threshold selection methods were investigated mathematically to see whether the same threshold can be produced using either presence/absence data or presence‐only data. We further adopted a simulation approach, created many virtual species with differing prevalences in a real landscape in south‐eastern A ustralia, generated data sets with different proportions of pseudo‐absences, built eight types of models with four modelling techniques, and investigated the behaviours of four threshold selection methods in these situations. Results: Three threshold selection methods were not affected by pseudo‐absences, including max SSS (which is based on maximizing the sum of sensitivity and specificity), the prevalence of model training data and the mean predicted value of a set of random points. Max SSS produced higher sensitivity in most cases and higher true skill statistic and kappa in many cases than the other methods. The other methods produced different thresholds from presence‐only data to those determined from presence/absence data. Main conclusions: Max SSS is a promising method for threshold selection when only presence data are available.

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/jbi.12058

Cites

2 of 2 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 1,613

Metadata

Authors
Liu, C., White, M., & Newell, G.
Venue
Journal of Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-01-07
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
778-789
ISSN
  • 0305-0270 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2699
OpenAlex
W2043446899
Cited by
1,613
References
2
FWCI
32.48
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.