Cited by 1,723Species Distribution and Climate ChangeEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesWildlife Ecology and Conservation

Making better M axent models of species distributions: complexity, overfitting and evaluation

Radosavljevic, Aleksandar, Anderson, Robert P.·2014·Journal of Biogeography

Abstract

Aim: Models of species niches and distributions have become invaluable to biogeographers over the past decade, yet several outstanding methodological issues remain. Here we address three critical ones: selecting appropriate evaluation data, detecting overfitting, and tuning program settings to approximate optimal model complexity. We integrate solutions to these issues for Maxent models, using the Caribbean spiny pocket mouse, H eteromys anomalus , as an example. Location: N orth‐western S outh A merica. Methods: We partitioned data into calibration and evaluation datasets via three variations of k ‐fold cross‐validation: randomly partitioned, geographically structured and masked geographically structured (which restricts background data to regions corresponding to calibration localities). Then, we carried out tuning experiments by varying the level of regularization, which controls model complexity. Finally, we gauged performance by quantifying discriminatory ability and overfitting, as well as via visual inspections of maps of the predictions in geography. Results: Performance varied among data‐partitioning approaches and among regularization multipliers. The randomly partitioned approach inflated estimates of model performance and the geographically structured approach showed high overfitting. In contrast, the masked geographically structured approach allowed selection of high‐performing models based on all criteria. Discriminatory ability showed a slight peak in performance around the default regularization multiplier. However, regularization levels two to four times higher than the default yielded substantially lower overfitting. Visual inspection of maps of model predictions coincided with the quantitative evaluations. Main conclusions: Species‐specific tuning of model parameters can improve the performance of Maxent models. Further, accurate estimates of model performance and overfitting depend on using independent evaluation data. These strategies for model evaluation may be useful for other modelling methods as well.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jbi.12227

Cites

2 of 2 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.

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 susceptibility to extreme extrapolation errors and overfitting induced by spatially constrained methods.

    “At the same time, this method also reduces the susceptibility of extreme extrapolation errors and over fi tting induced by spatially constrained methods, by assigning a percentage of the background points to be sampled randomly from the entire environmental extent (Radosavljevic and Anderson, 2014).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Radosavljevic, A., & Anderson, R. P.
Affiliations
  • Department of Biology City College of the City University of New York New York NY 10031 USA
  • The Graduate Center, CUNY (US)
Venue
Journal of Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-12-06
Volume
41
Issue
4
Pages
629-643
ISSN
  • 0305-0270 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2699
OpenAlex
W2172138805
Cited by
1,723
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 191 · 2025: 209 · 2024: 212 · 2023: 178 · 2022: 199 · 2021: 171 · 2020: 133 · 2019: 144 · 2018: 95 · 2017: 78 · 2016: 60 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 2
FWCI
25.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Biogeography (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • US National Science Foundation (NSF DEB-0717357, DEB-1119915)
  • International Biogeography Society
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, overfitting, model complexity, regularization, k-fold cross-validation, model evaluation, discriminatory ability, Heteromys anomalus, spiny pocket mouse, parameter tuning

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