Monotonicity-constrained species distribution models.

Flexible modeling frameworks for species distribution models based on generalized additive models that allow for smooth, nonlinear effects and interactions are of increasing importance in ecology. Commonly, the flexibility of such smooth function estimates is controlled by means of penalized estimation procedures. However, the actual shape remains unspecified. In many applications, this is not desirable as researchers have a priori assumptions on the shape of the estimated effects, with monotonicity being the most important. Here we demonstrate how monotonicity constraints can be incorporated in a recently proposed flexible framework for species distribution models. Our proposal allows monotonicity constraints to be imposed on smooth effects and on ordinal, categorical variables using an additional asymmetric L2 penalty. Model estimation and variable selection for Red Kite (Milvus milvus) breeding was conducted using the flexible boosting framework implemented in R package mboost.

[1]  Torsten Hothorn,et al.  A Framework for Unbiased Model Selection Based on Boosting , 2011 .

[2]  G. Tutz,et al.  Penalized Regression with Ordinal Predictors , 2009 .

[3]  H. Dette,et al.  A simple nonparametric estimator of a strictly monotone regression function , 2006 .

[4]  Torsten Hothorn,et al.  Model-based Boosting 2.0 , 2010, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

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

[6]  L. Fahrmeir,et al.  PENALIZED STRUCTURED ADDITIVE REGRESSION FOR SPACE-TIME DATA: A BAYESIAN PERSPECTIVE , 2004 .

[7]  Nicolai Meinshausen,et al.  LASSO Isotone for High-Dimensional Additive Isotonic Regression , 2010, 1006.2940.

[8]  Gerhard Tutz,et al.  Variable Selection and Model Choice in Geoadditive Regression Models , 2009, Biometrics.

[9]  Günther Nitsche,et al.  Atlas der Brutvögel Bayerns 1979-1983 , 1987 .

[10]  Boris Schröder,et al.  Decomposing environmental, spatial, and spatiotemporal components of species distributions , 2011 .

[11]  P. Bühlmann,et al.  Boosting With the L2 Loss , 2003 .

[12]  J. Leeuw,et al.  Isotone Optimization in R: Pool-Adjacent-Violators Algorithm (PAVA) and Active Set Methods , 2009 .

[13]  T. Hastie,et al.  Variation in demersal fish species richness in the oceans surrounding New Zealand: an analysis using boosted regression trees , 2006 .

[14]  Peter Buhlmann,et al.  BOOSTING ALGORITHMS: REGULARIZATION, PREDICTION AND MODEL FITTING , 2007, 0804.2752.

[15]  J. Elith,et al.  Do they? How do they? WHY do they differ? On finding reasons for differing performances of species distribution models , 2009 .

[16]  Paul H. C. Eilers,et al.  Flexible smoothing with B-splines and penalties , 1996 .