A comparison of statistical approaches for modelling fish species distributions

SUMMARY 1. The prediction of species distributions is of primary importance in ecology and conservation biology. Statistical models play an important role in this regard; however, researchers have little guidance when choosing between competing methodologies because few comparative studies have been conducted. 2. We provide a comprehensive comparison of traditional and alternative techniques for predicting species distributions using logistic regression analysis, linear discriminant analysis, classification trees and artificial neural networks to model: (1) the presence ⁄ absence of 27 fish species as a function of habitat conditions in 286 temperate lakes located in south-central Ontario, Canada and (2) simulated data sets exhibiting deterministic, linear and non-linear species response curves. 3. Detailed evaluation of model predictive power showed that approaches produced species models that differed in overall correct classification, specificity (i.e. ability to correctly predict species absence) and sensitivity (i.e. ability to correctly predict species presence) and in terms of which of the study lakes they correctly classified. On average, neural networks outperformed the other modelling approaches, although all approaches predicted species presence ⁄ absence with moderate to excellent success. 4. Based on simulated non-linear data, classification trees and neural networks greatly outperformed traditional approaches, whereas all approaches exhibited similar correct classification rates when modelling simulated linear data. 5. Detailed evaluation of model explanatory insight showed that the relative importance of the habitat variables in the species models varied among the approaches, where habitat variable importance was similar among approaches for some species and very different for others. 6. In general, differences in predictive power (both correct classification rate and identity of the lakes correctly classified) among the approaches corresponded with differences in habitat variable importance, suggesting that non-linear modelling approaches (i.e. classification trees and neural networks) are better able to capture and model complex, non-linear patterns found in ecological data. The results from the comparisons using simulated data further support this notion. 7. By employing parallel modelling approaches with the same set of data and focusing on comparing multiple metrics of predictive performance, researchers can begin to choose

[1]  Donald A. Jackson,et al.  Fish–Habitat Relationships in Lakes: Gaining Predictive and Explanatory Insight by Using Artificial Neural Networks , 2001 .

[2]  Paul H. Williams,et al.  Using probability of persistence to identify important areas for biodiversity conservation , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[3]  J. Francis Statistica for Windows , 1995 .

[4]  J. Post,et al.  Climate, Population Viability, and the Zoogeography of Temperate Fishes , 1990 .

[5]  Trevor Hastie,et al.  Neural Networks and Related Methods for Classification - Discussion , 1994 .

[6]  C. Findlay,et al.  Effect of introduced piscivores on native minnow communities in Adirondack lakes , 2000 .

[7]  S. Lek,et al.  The use of artificial neural networks to predict the presence of small‐bodied fish in a river , 1997 .

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

[9]  D. M. Titterington,et al.  [Neural Networks: A Review from Statistical Perspective]: Rejoinder , 1994 .

[10]  Wei-Yin Loh,et al.  A Comparison of Prediction Accuracy, Complexity, and Training Time of Thirty-Three Old and New Classification Algorithms , 2000, Machine Learning.

[11]  S. Manel,et al.  Comparing discriminant analysis, neural networks and logistic regression for predicting species distributions: a case study with a Himalayan river bird , 1999 .

[12]  David O. Evans,et al.  Introduction of Lake Trout (Salvelinus namaycush) to Inland Lakes of Ontario, Canada: Factors Contributing to Successful Colonization , 1995 .

[13]  A. J. Willis Ecological understanding. The nature of theory and the theory of nature , 1995 .

[14]  Brian D. Richter,et al.  Threats to Imperiled Freshwater Fauna , 1997 .

[15]  Charles E. McCulloch,et al.  MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS IN ECOLOGY AND SYSTEMATICS: PANACEA OR PANDORA'S BOX? , 1990 .

[16]  B. Efron The Efficiency of Logistic Regression Compared to Normal Discriminant Analysis , 1975 .

[17]  B. Chessman,et al.  PREDICTING DIATOM COMMUNITIES AT THE GENUS LEVEL FOR THE RAPID BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF RIVERS , 1999 .

[18]  Maureen M. Toner,et al.  RIVER HYDROLOGY AND RIPARIAN WETLANDS: A PREDICTIVE MODEL FOR ECOLOGICAL ASSEMBLY , 1997 .

[19]  D. M. Titterington,et al.  Neural Networks: A Review from a Statistical Perspective , 1994 .

[20]  Anthony Ricciardi,et al.  Extinction Rates of North American Freshwater Fauna , 1999 .

[21]  Kevin J. Gaston,et al.  A critique for macroecology , 1999 .

[22]  G. De’ath,et al.  CLASSIFICATION AND REGRESSION TREES: A POWERFUL YET SIMPLE TECHNIQUE FOR ECOLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS , 2000 .

[23]  J. Morgan,et al.  Problems in the Analysis of Survey Data, and a Proposal , 1963 .

[24]  A. Peterson,et al.  Predicting Species Invasions Using Ecological Niche Modeling: New Approaches from Bioinformatics Attack a Pressing Problem , 2001 .

[25]  G. Orians Micro And Macro In Ecological Theory , 1980 .

[26]  W. Loh,et al.  SPLIT SELECTION METHODS FOR CLASSIFICATION TREES , 1997 .

[27]  Byron K. Williams,et al.  Chance-corrected classification for use in discriminant analysis: Ecological applications , 1984 .

[28]  J. Lawton Patterns in Ecology , 1996 .

[29]  Paul A. Keddy,et al.  Assembly and response rules: two goals for predictive community ecology , 1992 .

[30]  David A. Elston,et al.  Empirical models for the spatial distribution of wildlife , 1993 .

[31]  S. Paulsen,et al.  Cyprinid distributions in Northeast U.S.A. lakes: evidence of regional-scale minnow biodiversity losses , 1997 .

[32]  P. Keddy,et al.  Prediction of Rarities from Habitat Variables: Coastal Plain Plants on Nova Scotian Lakeshores , 1992 .

[33]  Micheline Hanna Evaluation of Models Predicting Mixing Depth , 1990 .

[34]  Robert C. Bailey,et al.  Biological assessment of freshwater ecosystems using a reference condition approach: comparing predicted and actual benthic invertebrate communities in Yukon streams , 1998 .

[35]  Nicholas C. Collins,et al.  TREE REGRESSION ANALYSIS ON THE NESTING HABITAT OF SMALLMOUTH BASS , 1999 .

[36]  J. Magnuson,et al.  Intercontinental Comparison of Small-Lake Fish Assemblages: The Balance between Local and Regional Processes , 1990, The American Naturalist.

[37]  J. Casselman,et al.  Stable isotope evidence for the food web consequences of species invasions in lakes , 1999, Nature.

[38]  I. Dimopoulos,et al.  Application of neural networks to modelling nonlinear relationships in ecology , 1996 .

[39]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Learning representations by back-propagating errors , 1986, Nature.

[40]  Kurt Hornik,et al.  Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators , 1989, Neural Networks.

[41]  Mark R. Wade,et al.  Construction and Assessment of Classification Rules , 1999, Technometrics.

[42]  Donald A. Jackson,et al.  What controls who is where in freshwater fish communities the roles of biotic, abiotic, and spatial factors , 2001 .

[43]  C. K. Minns,et al.  Factors Affecting Fish Species Richness in Ontario Lakes , 1989 .

[44]  Clive G. Jones,et al.  The Anatomy of Theory , 1994 .

[45]  An analysis of the influence of annual thermal variables on the occurrence of fifteen warmwater fishes , 1999 .

[46]  S. Manel,et al.  Evaluating presence-absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence , 2001 .

[47]  Brian D. Ripley,et al.  Neural Networks and Related Methods for Classification , 1994 .

[48]  P. White,et al.  PREDICTION OF RARE-PLANT OCCURRENCE: A SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN EXAMPLE , 1998 .

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

[50]  P. Angermeier,et al.  characterizing fish community diversity across virginia landscapes: prerequisite for conservation , 1999 .

[51]  Don E. McAllister,et al.  Fishes of North America Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern: 1989 , 1979 .

[52]  Donald A. Jackson,et al.  Qualitative and quantitative sampling of lake fish communities , 1997 .

[53]  D. Pont,et al.  A probabilistic model characterizing fish assemblages of French rivers: a framework for environmental assessment , 2001 .

[54]  Sovan Lek,et al.  Modelling roach (Rutilus rutilus) microhabitat using linear and nonlinear techniques , 2000 .

[55]  Sarah H. Reichard,et al.  Predicting Invasions of Woody Plants Introduced into North America , 1997, Conservation Biology.

[56]  Stanley V. Gregory,et al.  Ecological uses for genetic algorithms: predicting fish distributions in complex physical habitats , 1995 .

[57]  J. E. Matuszek,et al.  Fish Species Richness in Relation to Lake Area, pH, and Other Abiotic Factors in Ontario Lakes , 1988 .

[58]  Predicting the macroinvertebrate faunas of rivers by multiple regression of biological and environmental differences , 1999 .

[59]  Marco A. Rodríguez,et al.  STRUCTURE OF FISH ASSEMBLAGES ALONG ENVIRONMENTAL GRADIENTS IN FLOODPLAIN LAKES OF THE ORINOCO RIVER , 1997 .

[60]  Donald A. Jackson,et al.  Biogeographic Associations in Fish Assemblages: Local vs. Regional Processes , 1989 .

[61]  G. David Garson,et al.  Interpreting neural-network connection weights , 1991 .

[62]  Vera Kurková,et al.  Kolmogorov's theorem and multilayer neural networks , 1992, Neural Networks.

[63]  Uygar Özesmi,et al.  An artificial neural network approach to spatial habitat modelling with interspecific interaction , 1999 .

[64]  Amy L. Harig,et al.  DEFINING AND RESTORING BIOLOGICAL INTEGRITYIN WILDERNESS LAKES , 1998 .

[65]  M. Hill,et al.  Data analysis in community and landscape ecology , 1987 .

[66]  Heekuck Oh,et al.  Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition , 1993, Adv. Comput..

[67]  J. Magnuson,et al.  ISOLATION VS. EXTINCTION IN THE ASSEMBLY OF FISHES IN SMALL NORTHERN LAKES , 1998 .

[68]  Denis White,et al.  Environmental correlates of species richness for native freshwater fish in Oregon, U.S.A. , 1999 .

[69]  Julian D. Olden,et al.  Illuminating the “black box”: a randomization approach for understanding variable contributions in artificial neural networks , 2002 .

[70]  M. Rodr STRUCTURE OF FISH ASSEMBLAGES ALONG ENVIRONMENTAL GRADIENTS IN FLOODPLAIN LAKES OF THE ORINOCO RIVER , 1997 .

[71]  S. J. Press,et al.  Choosing between Logistic Regression and Discriminant Analysis , 1978 .

[72]  Julian D. Olden,et al.  Torturing data for the sake of generality: How valid are our regression models? , 2000 .

[73]  J. F. Wright,et al.  Α comparison of alternative techniques for prediction of the fauna of running‐water sites in Great Britain , 1999 .

[74]  Donald A. Jackson,et al.  The influence of smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) predation and habitat complexity on the structure of littoral zone fish assemblages , 2001 .