Spatial uncertainty analysis of population models

Abstract This paper describes an approach for conducting spatial uncertainty analysis of spatial population models, and illustrates the ecological consequences of spatial uncertainty for landscapes with different properties. Spatial population models typically simulate birth, death, and migration on an input map that describes habitat. Typically, only a single “reference” map is available, but we can imagine that a collection of other, slightly different, maps could be drawn to represent a particular species’ habitat. As a first approximation, our approach assumes that spatial uncertainty (i.e., the variation among values assigned to a location by such a collection of maps) is constrained by characteristics of the reference map, regardless of how the map was produced. Our approach produces lower levels of uncertainty than alternative methods used in landscape ecology because we condition our alternative landscapes on local properties of the reference map. Simulated spatial uncertainty was higher near the borders of patches. Consequently, average uncertainty was highest for reference maps with equal proportions of suitable and unsuitable habitat, and no spatial autocorrelation. We used two population viability models to evaluate the ecological consequences of spatial uncertainty for landscapes with different properties. Spatial uncertainty produced larger variation among predictions of a spatially explicit model than those of a spatially implicit model. Spatially explicit model predictions of final female population size varied most among landscapes with enough clustered habitat to allow persistence. In contrast, predictions of population growth rate varied most among landscapes with only enough clustered habitat to support a small population, i.e., near a spatially mediated extinction threshold. We conclude that spatial uncertainty has the greatest effect on persistence when the amount and arrangement of suitable habitat are such that habitat capacity is near the minimum required for persistence.

[1]  Anthony W. King,et al.  Spatial Uncertainty and Ecological Models , 2004, Ecosystems.

[2]  P. Burrough,et al.  The indicator approach to categorical soil data: I. Theory , 1993 .

[3]  R. Webster,et al.  Optimal interpolation and isarithmic mapping of soil properties. II. Block kriging. , 1980 .

[4]  H. Pulliam,et al.  Sources, Sinks, and Population Regulation , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[5]  K. McGarigal,et al.  FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. , 1995 .

[6]  Robert V. O'Neill,et al.  A comparison of sensitivity analysis and error analysis based on a stream ecosystem model , 1981 .

[7]  Bruce T. Milne,et al.  Detecting Critical Scales in Fragmented Landscapes , 1997 .

[8]  Derek M. Pelletier,et al.  Ecosystem Consequences of Exotic Earthworm Invasion of North Temperate Forests , 2004, Ecosystems.

[9]  Denis White,et al.  PROJECTING WILDLIFE RESPONSES TO ALTERNATIVE FUTURE LANDSCAPES IN OREGON'S WILLAMETTE BASIN , 2004 .

[10]  Mats Gyllenberg,et al.  Minimum Viable Metapopulation Size , 1996, The American Naturalist.

[11]  A. Warrick,et al.  Optimization of Sampling Locations for Variogram Calculations , 1987 .

[12]  P. Burrough,et al.  The indicator approach to categorical soil data. II: Application to mapping and land use suitability analysis , 1993 .

[13]  Eric J. Gustafson,et al.  Simulating dispersal of reintroduced species within heterogeneous landscapes , 2004 .

[14]  J. Jaime Gómez-Hernández,et al.  Theory and Practice of Sequential Simulation , 1994 .

[15]  J. Jaime Gómez-Hernández,et al.  ISIM3D: and ANSI-C three-dimensional multiple indicator conditional simulation program , 1990 .

[16]  S. P. Neuman,et al.  Analysis of nonintrinsic spatial variability by residual kriging with application to regional groundwater levels , 1984 .

[17]  E. Isaaks,et al.  Indicator Simulation: Application to the Simulation of a High Grade Uranium Mineralization , 1984 .

[18]  R. Webster,et al.  Optimal interpolation and isarithmic mapping of soil properties: I The semi‐variogram and punctual kriging , 1980, European Journal of Soil Science.

[19]  Edzer Pebesma,et al.  GSTAT: a program for geostatistical modelling, prediction and simulation , 1998 .

[20]  R. Cormack Statistical Challenges in the Environmental Sciences: A Personal View , 1988 .

[21]  Ganapati P. Patil,et al.  Stochastic generating models for simulating hierarchically structured multi-cover landscapes , 1999, Landscape Ecology.

[22]  Scott Ferson,et al.  Sensitivity analysis for models of population viability , 1995 .

[23]  B. Danielson,et al.  Spatially Explicit Population Models: Current Forms and Future Uses , 1995 .

[24]  Helen M. Regan,et al.  Mapping epistemic uncertainties and vague concepts in predictions of species distribution , 2002 .

[25]  A. Hansen,et al.  DYNAMIC HABITAT AND POPULATION ANALYSIS: AN APPROACH TO RESOLVE THE BIODIVERSITY MANAGER'S DILEMMA , 1999 .

[26]  Gerard B.M. Heuvelink,et al.  Uncertainty analysis in environmental modelling under a change of spatial scale , 1998, Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems.

[27]  N. Cressie Fitting variogram models by weighted least squares , 1985 .

[28]  P. W. Borth,et al.  Stochastic Simulation for Characterizing Ecological Spatial Patterns and Appraising Risk. , 1993, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[29]  Anthony W. King,et al.  Analysis of landscape sources and sinks: the effect of spatial pattern on avian demography , 2001 .

[30]  B. M. Rutherford,et al.  Stochastic Simultation for Imaging Spatial Uncertainty: Comparison and Evaluation of Available Algorithms , 1994 .

[31]  Carolyn T. Hunsaker,et al.  Spatial uncertainty in ecology : implications for remote sensing and GIS applications , 2002 .

[32]  O. Rhodes,et al.  Population Dynamics in Ecological Space and Time , 1996 .

[33]  A. Journel,et al.  Geostatistics for natural resources characterization , 1984 .

[34]  J. Bart Acceptance Criteria for Using Individual‐Based Models to Make Management Decisions , 1995 .

[35]  Mark E. Ritchie,et al.  Populations in a Landscape Context: Sources, Sinks, and Metapopulations , 1997 .

[36]  R. Levins Evolution in Changing Environments: Some Theoretical Explorations. (MPB-2) , 1968 .