Determining the Minimal Background Area for Species Distribution Models: MinBar PACKAGE

One of the crucial choices when modelling species distributions using pseudo-absences approaches is the delineation of the background area to fit the model. We hypothesise that there is a minimum background area around the centre of the species distribution that characterizes well enough the range of environmental conditions needed by the species to survive. Thus, fitting the model within this area should be the optimal solution in terms of both quality of the model and execution time. MinBAR is an R package that calculates the optimal background area. The version 1.0.0 is implemented for MaxEnt and uses Boyce Index as a metric to assess models performance. Two case studies are presented to assess the hypothesis and to illustrate the package. Partial models trained with part of the species distribution often perform better than those fitted on the entire extension. MinBAR is a versatile tool that helps modellers to objectively define the optimal solution.

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

[2]  Robert P. Anderson,et al.  The effect of the extent of the study region on GIS models of species geographic distributions and estimates of niche evolution: preliminary tests with montane rodents (genus Nephelomys) in Venezuela , 2010 .

[3]  Robert P. Anderson,et al.  Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions , 2006 .

[4]  Thomas A. Groen,et al.  Transferability of species distribution models: The case of Phytophthora cinnamomi in Southwest Spain and Southwest Australia , 2016 .

[5]  J. Lobo,et al.  Species distribution models that do not incorporate global data misrepresent potential distributions: a case study using Iberian diving beetles , 2011 .

[6]  Robert P. Anderson,et al.  Toward ecologically realistic predictions of species distributions: A cross‐time example from tropical montane cloud forests , 2018, Global change biology.

[7]  A. Peterson,et al.  The crucial role of the accessible area in ecological niche modeling and species distribution modeling , 2011 .

[8]  Catherine S. Jarnevich,et al.  Minimizing effects of methodological decisions on interpretation and prediction in species distribution studies: An example with background selection , 2017 .

[9]  Raes Niels,et al.  Partial versus Full Species Distribution Models , 2012 .

[10]  A. Hirzel,et al.  Evaluating the ability of habitat suitability models to predict species presences , 2006 .

[11]  Alberto Jiménez-Valverde,et al.  Delimiting the geographical background in species distribution modelling , 2012 .

[12]  M. Araújo,et al.  BIOMOD – a platform for ensemble forecasting of species distributions , 2009 .

[13]  Carsten F Dormann,et al.  Wrong, but useful: regional species distribution models may not be improved by range‐wide data under biased sampling , 2018, Ecology and evolution.

[14]  Antoine Guisan,et al.  ecospat: an R package to support spatial analyses and modeling of species niches and distributions , 2017 .

[15]  Trevor Hastie,et al.  A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists , 2011 .

[16]  CasacubertaFrancisco,et al.  Maximum Entropy Modeling , 2005 .