Transferability of predictive fish distribution models in two coastal systems

Abstract Species distribution modelling has emerged as a tool both for exploring niche theory and for producing distribution maps for management. To understand and predict potential effects of large scale habitat change there is a need for proper model validation and applicability also in unstudied areas. However, knowledge about factors influencing the transferability of distribution models, i.e. the accuracy of the models when applying them in a new geographical area, is limited. We have successfully modelled the larval distribution of two fish species, northern pike ( Esox lucius L.) and roach ( Rutilus rutilus L.), on a regional scale in the Baltic Sea using a few and easily measured environmental variables. When models were transferred from the training area to the testing area the models showed reasonable to very good discrimination (ROC 0.75 and 0.93) based on external validation using independent data separated also in time (1–2 years). The predicted larval distribution also overlapped with the distribution of young-of-the-year fish later in the season. Performance when reversing the transfer, by constructing the models in the testing area and predicting back to the original training area, was less successful. This discrepancy was species-specific and could be explained by differences in the species presence ranges along the predictor variables in the testing area compared to the training area. Our results illustrate how transferability success can be influenced by area-specific differences in the range of the predictor variables and show the necessity of validating model predictions properly.

[1]  H. Pulliam On the relationship between niche and distribution , 2000 .

[2]  M. Lehtiniemi,et al.  Growth of pike larvae (Esox lucius) under different conditions of food quality and salinity , 2005 .

[3]  M. Freeman,et al.  Transferability of Habitat Suitability Criteria for Fishes in Warmwater Streams , 1997 .

[4]  Corinne Martin,et al.  Modelling species distributions using regression quantiles , 2007 .

[5]  S. Lavorel,et al.  Effects of restricting environmental range of data to project current and future species distributions , 2004 .

[6]  Antoine Guisan,et al.  Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology , 2000 .

[7]  R. Hudd,et al.  Fish reproduction and the impact of acidification in the Kyrönjoki River estuary in the Baltic Sea , 1990, Environmental Biology of Fishes.

[8]  U. Bergström,et al.  Characterisation of juvenile flatfish habitats in the Baltic Sea , 2009 .

[9]  A. Lappalainen,et al.  Roach (Rutilus rutilus) as an important predator on blue mussel (Mytilus edulis) populations in a brackish water environment, the northern Baltic Sea , 2005 .

[10]  Erik Bonsdorff,et al.  Small-scale spatial structure of Baltic Sea zoobenthos—inferring processes from patterns , 2002 .

[11]  R. Real,et al.  AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models , 2008 .

[12]  Antoine Guisan,et al.  Are niche-based species distribution models transferable in space? , 2006 .

[13]  Jonas Nilsson Predation of Northern Pike (Esox lucius L.) Eggs: A Possible Cause of Regionally Poor Recruitment in the Baltic Sea , 2005, Hydrobiologia.

[14]  G. De’ath Boosted trees for ecological modeling and prediction. , 2007, Ecology.

[15]  M. Austin Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between ecological theory and statistical modelling , 2002 .

[16]  M. Austin Species distribution models and ecological theory: A critical assessment and some possible new approaches , 2007 .

[17]  Simon Ferrier,et al.  Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression , 2000 .

[18]  H. Akaike A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[19]  Martin Isaeus Factors structuring Fucus communities at open and complex coastlines in the Baltic Sea , 2004 .

[20]  D. Rogers,et al.  The effects of species’ range sizes on the accuracy of distribution models: ecological phenomenon or statistical artefact? , 2004 .

[21]  Joseph M. Culp,et al.  Transferability of Habitat Suitability Curves for a Benthic Minnow, Rhinichthys cataractae , 1997 .

[22]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Generalized Additive Models , 1991 .

[23]  L. Ljunggren,et al.  Influence of visual conditions on foraging and growth of juvenile fishes with dissimilar sensory physiology , 2007 .

[24]  Antoine Guisan,et al.  Niche dynamics in space and time. , 2008, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[25]  A. Sandström,et al.  Effects of Eutrophication on Young-of-the-year Freshwater Fish Communities in Coastal Areas of the Baltic , 2004, Environmental Biology of Fishes.

[26]  M. Appelberg,et al.  Trends in coastal fish stocks of the Baltic Sea , 2006 .

[27]  W. Thuiller,et al.  Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. , 2005, Ecology letters.

[28]  Anthony Lehmann,et al.  GRASP: generalized regression analysis and spatial prediction , 2002 .

[29]  J. Craig,et al.  A short review of pike ecology , 2008, Hydrobiologia.

[30]  L. Hannah,et al.  Would climate change drive species out of reserves? An assessment of existing reserve‐selection methods , 2004 .

[31]  John Bell,et al.  A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models , 1997, Environmental Conservation.

[32]  Kajsa Rosqvist,et al.  Fish assemblages in coastal lagoons in land-uplift succession: The relative importance of local and regional environmental gradients , 2009 .

[33]  A. Lehmann,et al.  Improving generalized regression analysis for the spatial prediction of forest communities , 2006 .

[34]  A. Fielding,et al.  Testing the Generality of Bird‐Habitat Models , 1995 .

[35]  Maiju Lehtiniemi,et al.  Turbidity decreases anti-predator behaviour in pike larvae, Esox lucius , 2005, Environmental Biology of Fishes.

[36]  Donald A. Jackson,et al.  Predictive Models of Fish Species Distributions: A Note on Proper Validation and Chance Predictions , 2002 .

[37]  B. K. Eriksson,et al.  Boating and Navigation Activities Influence the Recruitment of Fish in a Baltic Sea Archipelago Area , 2005, Ambio.

[38]  Martin Isaeus,et al.  Effects of boating activities on aquatic vegetation in the Stockholm archipelago, Baltic Sea. , 2004 .

[39]  H. Kautsky,et al.  Spatial predictions of Baltic phytobenthic communities: Measuring robustness of generalized additive models based on transect data , 2008 .

[40]  A. Koed,et al.  Short‐term salinity tolerance of northern pike, Esox lucius, fry, related to temperature and size , 2007 .

[41]  L. Urho,et al.  Reproduction of pike (Esox lucius) in reed belt shores of the SW coast of Finland, Baltic Sea: a new survey approach , 2008 .

[42]  J. Casselman,et al.  Habitat requirements of northern pike ( Essox lucius ) , 1996 .