Multispectral canopy reflectance improves spatial distribution models of Amazonian understory species

Species distribution models are required for the research and management of biodiversity in the hyperdiverse tropical forests, but reliable and ecologically relevant digital environmental data layers are not always available. We here assess the usefulness of multispectral canopy reflectance (Landsat) relative to climate data in modelling understory plant species distributions in tropical rainforests. We used a large dataset of quantitative fern and lycophyte species inventories across lowland Amazonia as the basis for species distribution modelling (SDM). As predictors, we used CHELSA climatic variables and canopy reflectance values from a recent basin‐wide composite of Landsat TM/ETM+ images both separately and in combination. We also investigated how species accumulate over sites when environmental distances were expressed in terms of climatic or surface reflectance variables. When species accumulation curves were constructed such that differences in Landsat reflectance among the selected plots were maximised, species accumulated faster than when climatic differences were maximised or plots were selected in a random order. Sixty‐nine species were sufficiently frequent for species distribution modelling. For most of them, adequate SDMs were obtained whether the models were based on CHELSA data only, Landsat data only or both combined. Model performance was not influenced by species’ prevalence or abundance. Adding Landsat‐based environmental data layers overall improved the discriminatory capacity of SDMs compared to climate‐only models, especially for soil specialist species. Our results show that canopy surface reflectance obtained by multispectral sensors can provide studies of tropical ecology, as exemplified by SDMs, much higher thematic (taxonomic) detail than is generally assumed. Furthermore, multispectral datasets complement the traditionally used climatic layers in analyses requiring information on environmental site conditions. We demonstrate the utility of freely available, global remote sensing data for biogeographical studies that can aid conservation planning and biodiversity management.

[1]  H. Tuomisto,et al.  A Landsat composite covering all Amazonia for applications in ecology and conservation , 2018 .

[2]  Anna F. Cord,et al.  Linking earth observation and taxonomic, structural and functional biodiversity: local to ecosystem perspectives , 2016 .

[3]  A. Rylands Priority areas for conservation in the Amazon , 1990 .

[4]  Gabriela Zuquim,et al.  Beyond climate control on species range: The importance of soil data to predict distribution of Amazonian plant species , 2018 .

[5]  Alberto Jiménez-Valverde,et al.  The uncertain nature of absences and their importance in species distribution modelling , 2010 .

[6]  Oliver L. Phillips,et al.  Habitat association among Amazonian tree species: a landscape‐scale approach , 2003 .

[7]  Hanna Tuomisto,et al.  Dissecting Amazonian Biodiversity , 1995, Science.

[8]  Sassan Saatchi,et al.  Modeling distribution of Amazonian tree species and diversity using remote sensing measurements , 2008 .

[9]  Kalle Ruokolainen,et al.  LINKING FLORISTIC PATTERNS WITH SOIL HETEROGENEITY AND SATELLITE IMAGERY IN ECUADORIAN AMAZONIA , 2003 .

[10]  Kalle Ruokolainen,et al.  Across-path DN gradient in Landsat TM imagery of Amazonian forests: A challenge for image interpretation and mosaicking , 2006 .

[11]  Kalle Ruokolainen,et al.  A compositional turnover zone of biogeographical magnitude within lowland Amazonia , 2016 .

[12]  J. L. Parra,et al.  Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas , 2005 .

[13]  Glenn De'ath,et al.  Extended dissimilarity: a method of robust estimation of ecological distances from high beta diversity data , 1999, Plant Ecology.

[14]  Duccio Rocchini,et al.  Maximizing plant species inventory efficiency by means of remotely sensed spectral distances , 2005 .

[15]  Kalle Ruokolainen,et al.  Modelling responses of western Amazonian palms to soil nutrients , 2017 .

[16]  Gregory Asner,et al.  Use of Landsat and SRTM Data to Detect Broad-Scale Biodiversity Patterns in Northwestern Amazonia , 2012, Remote. Sens..

[17]  Kalle Ruokolainen,et al.  Mapping gradual landscape-scale floristic changes in Amazonian primary rain forests by combining ordination and remote sensing , 2005 .

[18]  Giles M. Foody,et al.  Satellite remote sensing to monitor species diversity: potential and pitfalls , 2016 .

[19]  Kalle Ruokolainen,et al.  Using remote sensing to model tree species distribution in Peruvian lowland Amazonia , 2018, Biotropica.

[20]  H. Tuomisto,et al.  Influence of edaphic specialization on pteridophyte distribution in neotropical rain forests , 1996 .

[21]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Towards a hierarchical framework for modelling the spatial distribution of animals , 2001 .

[22]  H. Tuomisto,et al.  The importance of soils in predicting the future of plant habitat suitability in a tropical forest , 2019, Plant and Soil.

[23]  Olaf Conrad,et al.  Climatologies at high resolution for the earth’s land surface areas , 2016, Scientific Data.

[24]  H. Tuomisto,et al.  Discovering floristic and geoecological gradients across Amazonia , 2019, Journal of Biogeography.

[25]  S. Velazco,et al.  Using worldwide edaphic data to model plant species niches: An assessment at a continental extent , 2017, PloS one.

[26]  Gregory P. Asner,et al.  Environmental drivers of tree community turnover in western Amazonian forests , 2016 .

[27]  Kalle Ruokolainen,et al.  Geological control of floristic composition in Amazonian forests , 2011, Journal of biogeography.

[28]  Duccio Rocchini,et al.  Will remote sensing shape the next generation of species distribution models? , 2015 .

[29]  Kalle Ruokolainen,et al.  Are floristic and edaphic patterns in Amazonian rain forests congruent for trees, pteridophytes and Melastomataceae? , 2007, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[30]  J. Elith,et al.  Species Distribution Models: Ecological Explanation and Prediction Across Space and Time , 2009 .

[31]  Hanna Tuomisto,et al.  Mapping environmental variation in lowland Amazonian rainforests using remote sensing and floristic data , 2013 .

[32]  C. Braak,et al.  Inferring pH from diatoms: a comparison of old and new calibration methods , 1989, Hydrobiologia.

[33]  Brett G. Dickson,et al.  Species detection vs. habitat suitability: Are we biasing habitat suitability models with remotely sensed data? , 2012 .

[34]  Omri Allouche,et al.  Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic (TSS) , 2006 .

[35]  Jasper Van doninck,et al.  Evaluation of directional normalization methods for Landsat TM/ETM+ over primary Amazonian lowland forests , 2017, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[36]  Kalle Ruokolainen,et al.  Floristic patterns along a 43‐km long transect in an Amazonian rain forest , 2003 .

[37]  Jaime A. Chaves,et al.  Predicting species distributions across the Amazonian and Andean regions using remote sensing data , 2008 .

[38]  G. Asner,et al.  Characterizing tropical forests with multispectral imagery , 2015 .

[39]  H. Tuomisto,et al.  Using digital soil maps to infer edaphic affinities of plant species in Amazonia: Problems and prospects , 2017, Ecology and evolution.

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

[41]  Kati J. Salovaara,et al.  Classification of Amazonian primary rain forest vegetation using Landsat ETM+ satellite imagery , 2005 .

[42]  W. Magnusson,et al.  Limitations to the Use of Species-Distribution Models for Environmental-Impact Assessments in the Amazon , 2016, PloS one.

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

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

[45]  M. Araújo,et al.  Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling , 2006 .

[46]  E. Ferreira,et al.  Predição da distribuição de espécies florestais usando variáveis topográficas e de índice de vegetação no leste do Acre, Brasil , 2015 .

[47]  H. Nagendra,et al.  High resolution satellite imagery for tropical biodiversity studies: the devil is in the detail , 2008, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[48]  Jasper Van doninck,et al.  Influence of Compositing Criterion and Data Availability on Pixel-Based Landsat TM/ETM+ Image Compositing Over Amazonian Forests , 2017, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing.

[49]  C. Justice,et al.  High-Resolution Global Maps of 21st-Century Forest Cover Change , 2013, Science.

[50]  H. Tuomisto,et al.  Floristic composition and across-track reflectance gradient in Landsat images over Amazonian forests , 2016 .

[51]  Marvin N. Wright,et al.  SoilGrids250m: Global gridded soil information based on machine learning , 2017, PloS one.

[52]  H. Tuomisto,et al.  Making the most of scarce data: Mapping soil gradients in data‐poor areas using species occurrence records , 2019, Methods in Ecology and Evolution.

[53]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[54]  Gabriela Zuquim,et al.  Predicting environmental gradients with fern species composition in Brazilian Amazonia , 2014 .