Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biome
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43388-022-00101-5 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/240597 |
Resumo: | Mapping species distributions has become central for biodiversity research. Different mapping methods, however, may result in dramatically different spatial patterns. We used expert-drawn maps (EDMs), minimum convex polygons (MCPs), ecological niche models (ENMs), and consensus models, to compare patterns of species ranges and species richness in 12 species of Psittacidae in a poorly known Neotropical ecosystem, the Caatinga Dry Forest. We validated results by comparing the ability of each method to predict the number of Psittacidae species in 17 localities with well-studied avifaunas. Size ranges were highly correlated (from 0.7 to 0.9) among mapping methods, but presented critical spatial differences, which resulted in very different patterns of species richness. When confronted with real data, MCPs and the EDM/MCP consensus method, both correctly predicted the presence of ~ 90% of the species present in the studied areas. However, when taking commission errors into account, MCPs presented the lowest efficiency (56%) among all methods. All three consensus methods (ENM/EDM, ENM/MCP, and EDM/MCP) performed better (> 74% efficiency) than any single method. We conclude that single mapping methods are prone to both higher omission and commission errors, and advocate for the use of consensus methods whenever species ranges will be used in macroecological studies. |
id |
UNSP_be6193baf58c4f637f9dacad5ac4d4c0 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/240597 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biomeCaatingaMapping methodsParrotsSpecies rangesSpecies richnessMapping species distributions has become central for biodiversity research. Different mapping methods, however, may result in dramatically different spatial patterns. We used expert-drawn maps (EDMs), minimum convex polygons (MCPs), ecological niche models (ENMs), and consensus models, to compare patterns of species ranges and species richness in 12 species of Psittacidae in a poorly known Neotropical ecosystem, the Caatinga Dry Forest. We validated results by comparing the ability of each method to predict the number of Psittacidae species in 17 localities with well-studied avifaunas. Size ranges were highly correlated (from 0.7 to 0.9) among mapping methods, but presented critical spatial differences, which resulted in very different patterns of species richness. When confronted with real data, MCPs and the EDM/MCP consensus method, both correctly predicted the presence of ~ 90% of the species present in the studied areas. However, when taking commission errors into account, MCPs presented the lowest efficiency (56%) among all methods. All three consensus methods (ENM/EDM, ENM/MCP, and EDM/MCP) performed better (> 74% efficiency) than any single method. We conclude that single mapping methods are prone to both higher omission and commission errors, and advocate for the use of consensus methods whenever species ranges will be used in macroecological studies.Programa de Pós-graduação em Etnobiologia e Conservação da Natureza Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco–UFRPE, PALaboratório de Ecologia & Evolução de Aves Departamento de Zoologia Universidade Federal de Pernambuco–UFPE, PELaboratório de Ecologia Espacial e Conservação–LEEC Departamento de Ecologia Universidade Estadual Paulista–UNESP, SPLaboratório de Ecologia Espacial e Conservação–LEEC Departamento de Ecologia Universidade Estadual Paulista–UNESP, SPUniversidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco–UFRPEUniversidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE)Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Leandro-Silva, VictorSilva, Marcos Vinicius Alexandre daPinto, Flávia Santos [UNESP]Naka, Luciano Nicolás2023-03-01T20:24:22Z2023-03-01T20:24:22Z2022-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43388-022-00101-5Ornithology Research.2662-673Xhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/24059710.1007/s43388-022-00101-52-s2.0-85135468250Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengOrnithology Researchinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2023-03-01T20:24:22Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/240597Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T15:02:21.005413Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biome |
title |
Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biome |
spellingShingle |
Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biome Leandro-Silva, Victor Caatinga Mapping methods Parrots Species ranges Species richness |
title_short |
Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biome |
title_full |
Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biome |
title_fullStr |
Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biome |
title_full_unstemmed |
Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biome |
title_sort |
Using consensus mapping methods as an efficient way of depicting avian distributions in the Caatinga Dry Forest, a poorly known Neotropical biome |
author |
Leandro-Silva, Victor |
author_facet |
Leandro-Silva, Victor Silva, Marcos Vinicius Alexandre da Pinto, Flávia Santos [UNESP] Naka, Luciano Nicolás |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Silva, Marcos Vinicius Alexandre da Pinto, Flávia Santos [UNESP] Naka, Luciano Nicolás |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco–UFRPE Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE) Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Leandro-Silva, Victor Silva, Marcos Vinicius Alexandre da Pinto, Flávia Santos [UNESP] Naka, Luciano Nicolás |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Caatinga Mapping methods Parrots Species ranges Species richness |
topic |
Caatinga Mapping methods Parrots Species ranges Species richness |
description |
Mapping species distributions has become central for biodiversity research. Different mapping methods, however, may result in dramatically different spatial patterns. We used expert-drawn maps (EDMs), minimum convex polygons (MCPs), ecological niche models (ENMs), and consensus models, to compare patterns of species ranges and species richness in 12 species of Psittacidae in a poorly known Neotropical ecosystem, the Caatinga Dry Forest. We validated results by comparing the ability of each method to predict the number of Psittacidae species in 17 localities with well-studied avifaunas. Size ranges were highly correlated (from 0.7 to 0.9) among mapping methods, but presented critical spatial differences, which resulted in very different patterns of species richness. When confronted with real data, MCPs and the EDM/MCP consensus method, both correctly predicted the presence of ~ 90% of the species present in the studied areas. However, when taking commission errors into account, MCPs presented the lowest efficiency (56%) among all methods. All three consensus methods (ENM/EDM, ENM/MCP, and EDM/MCP) performed better (> 74% efficiency) than any single method. We conclude that single mapping methods are prone to both higher omission and commission errors, and advocate for the use of consensus methods whenever species ranges will be used in macroecological studies. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-01-01 2023-03-01T20:24:22Z 2023-03-01T20:24:22Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43388-022-00101-5 Ornithology Research. 2662-673X http://hdl.handle.net/11449/240597 10.1007/s43388-022-00101-5 2-s2.0-85135468250 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43388-022-00101-5 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/240597 |
identifier_str_mv |
Ornithology Research. 2662-673X 10.1007/s43388-022-00101-5 2-s2.0-85135468250 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Ornithology Research |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808128450053013504 |