IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0226971.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the ecological niche model approach in spatial conservation prioritization

Author

Listed:
  • Fumiko Ishihama
  • Akio Takenaka
  • Hiroyuki Yokomizo
  • Taku Kadoya

Abstract

Ecological niche models (ENMs) are widely used in spatial prioritization for biodiversity conservation (e.g. selecting conservation areas). However, it is unclear whether ENMs are always beneficial for such purposes. We quantified the benefit of using ENMs in conservation prioritization, comparing the numbers of species covered by conservation areas selected on the basis of probabilities estimated by ENMs (ENM approach) and those selected on the basis of raw observation data (raw-data approach), while controlling survey range, survey bias, and target size of conservation area. We evaluated three ENM algorithms (GLM, GAM, and random forests). We used virtual community data generated by simulation for the evaluation. ENM approach was effective when survey bias is strong, survey range is narrow, and target size of conservation area is moderate. The percentage of cases in which the ENM approach outperformed the raw-data approach ranged from 0.0 to 33% (GLM), 31% (GAM), and 75% (random forests) depending on conditions. The number of rare species (

Suggested Citation

  • Fumiko Ishihama & Akio Takenaka & Hiroyuki Yokomizo & Taku Kadoya, 2019. "Evaluation of the ecological niche model approach in spatial conservation prioritization," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-17, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0226971
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226971
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0226971
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0226971&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0226971?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard A. Fuller & Eve McDonald-Madden & Kerrie A. Wilson & Josie Carwardine & Hedley S. Grantham & James E. M. Watson & Carissa J. Klein & David C. Green & Hugh P. Possingham, 2010. "Replacing underperforming protected areas achieves better conservation outcomes," Nature, Nature, vol. 466(7304), pages 365-367, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bernard W T Coetzee & Kevin J Gaston & Steven L Chown, 2014. "Local Scale Comparisons of Biodiversity as a Test for Global Protected Area Ecological Performance: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-11, August.
    2. repec:dav:journl:y:2016:v:7:i:11:p:1272-1289 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Clare Morrison & Clay Simpkins & J Guy Castley & Ralf C Buckley, 2012. "Tourism and the Conservation of Critically Endangered Frogs," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(9), pages 1-9, September.
    4. Qiaoqiao Zhan & Katsunori Furuya & Xiaolan Tang & Zhehui Li, 2024. "Policy Development in China’s Protected Scenic and Historic Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Weerasena, Lakmali & Shier, Douglas & Tonkyn, David & McFeaters, Mark & Collins, Christopher, 2023. "A sequential approach to reserve design with compactness and contiguity considerations," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 478(C).
    6. Pannell, David J., 2013. "Value for Money in Environmental Policy and Environmental Economics," Working Papers 146501, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    7. Craig Packer & Stephen Polasky, 2018. "Reconciling corruption with conservation triage: Should investments shift from the last best places?," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(8), pages 1-6, August.
    8. Ana Iglesias & David Santillán & Luis Garrote, 2018. "On the Barriers to Adaption to Less Water under Climate Change: Policy Choices in Mediterranean Countries," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(15), pages 4819-4832, December.
    9. Gerling, Charlotte & Schöttker, Oliver & Hearne, John, 2022. "Irreversible and partly reversible investments in the optimal reserve design problem: the role of flexibility under climate change," MPRA Paper 112089, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Lissa M Barr & Robert L Pressey & Richard A Fuller & Daniel B Segan & Eve McDonald-Madden & Hugh P Possingham, 2011. "A New Way to Measure the World's Protected Area Coverage," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-4, September.
    11. Gerling, Charlotte & Schöttker, Oliver & Hearne, John, 2022. "Keep it or Leave it - the Role of Reversible Conservation Investments in Optimal Reserve Design under Climate Change," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264058, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Yi Deng & Ziyi Mao & Jinling Huang & Faling Yan & Shenghai Han & Anqi Li, 2022. "Spatial Patterns of Natural Protected Areas and Construction of Protected Area Groups in Guangdong Province," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-25, November.
    13. Gerling, Charlotte & Schöttker, Oliver & Hearne, John, 2022. "The ”climate adaptation problem” in biodiversity conservation: the role of reversible conservation investments in optimal reserve design under climate change," MPRA Paper 114812, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Zhihao Huang & Yangjing Peng & Ruifeng Wang & Guofa Cui & Bo Zhang & Nachuan Lu, 2021. "Exploring the Rapid Assessment Method for Nature Reserve Landscape Protection Effectiveness—A Case Study of Liancheng National Nature Reserve, Gansu, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, April.
    15. Sierra-Altamiranda, Alvaro & Charkhgard, Hadi & Eaton, Mitchell & Martin, Julien & Yurek, Simeon & Udell, Bradley J., 2020. "Spatial conservation planning under uncertainty using modern portfolio theory and Nash bargaining solution," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 423(C).
    16. Jian Chen & Hong Shi & Xin Wang & Yiduo Zhang & Zihan Zhang, 2022. "Effectiveness of China’s Protected Areas in Mitigating Human Activity Pressure," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-16, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0226971. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.