Biotic interactions improve prediction of boreal bird distributions at macro‐scales

By Risto Heikkinen, Miska Luoto, Raimo Virkkala, Richard G. Pearson, J. Körber. 2007

388 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/809f6b8b95d9849eb3157bb889c1f597251bf8a3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecological Modeling

In Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

New trends in species distribution modelling (2010, methodology): “…interactions have been included in SDMs as occurrence (Heikkinen et al. 2007), counts or frequencies (Leathwick and Austin 2001, Leathwick 2002, Heikkinen et al. 2007), proportional data (Meier et al. 2010a), basal area (Rouget et al. 2001), or as a competition coefficient (Strubbe et al.…”
Accounting for uncertainty when mapping species distributions: The need for maps of ignorance (2011, background): “Realized species distributions are shaped not only by environmental conditions, but also by a number of other factors including biotic interactions (Heikkinen et al., 2007; Schweiger et al., 2008), biogeographical constraints and historical events (for detailed Rocchini et al.”
Understanding co‐occurrence by modelling species simultaneously with a Joint Species Distribution Model (JSDM) (2014, background): “The addition of biotic interaction terms has generally improved the predictive performance of SDMs (Araujo & Luoto 2007; Heikkinen et al. 2007), and in some cases, biotic predictors have outperformed abiotic variables (Meier et al.”
Does the interpolation accuracy of species distribution models come at the expense of transferability (2012, neutral): “(2006, 2007), Kivinen et al. (2008), and Pöyry et al.”
Empirical Evidence for the Scale Dependence of Biotic Interactions (2015, background): “…occurrences at a resolution of 50 km were improved by incorporating the distribution of host plants (Araujo & Luoto, 2007) and predictions of owl distributions were improved by incorporating positive interactions with woodpeckers within 10 km and, to a lesser extent, 40 km (Heikkinen et al., 2007).”
No silver bullets in correlative ecological niche modelling: insights from testing among many potential algorithms for niche estimation (2015, background): “We excluded biotic interactions not because they are unimportant (see Leathwick 1998; Heikkinen et al. 2007; Kissling et al. 2012); rather, biotic interactions create dynamic complications that are complex and poorly understood (Gilman et al. 2010) and may be manifested at fine spatial resolutions…”
Niches and distributional areas: Concepts, methods, and assumptions (2009, background): “The immediate question, then, is how feasible is predicting distributional areas without resorting to data pertinent to B? Lack of documentation of the role of biotic interactions in ENM has been often mentioned as an important limitation to reliable predictions of species’ distributions (49) and ex”
Comparison of six correlative models in predictive vegetation mapping on a local scale (2012, methodology): “The stability values of AUC were calculated using proposed formula by Heikinnen et al. (2007). We produced extra independent data sets by additional random sampling in the same region, including in total 470 samples sites with prevalence 0.”
The importance of biotic interactions in species distribution models: a test of the Eltonian noise hypothesis using parrots (2014, methodology): “There is a growing interest in studies that explicitly tackle these questions (e.g. Ara ujo & Luoto, 2007; Heikkinen et al., 2007; Real et al., 2009; Costa & Schlupp, 2010; Meier et al., 2010).”
How Useful Are Species Distribution Models for Managing Biodiversity under Future Climates (2010, background): “Some SDMs have successfully incorporated interactions between species (Leathwick and Austin 2001, Leathwick 2002; Heikkinen et al. 2007, Rödder et al. 2008), and a small number have also included climate change (Araújo and Luoto 2007).”
Adapt or disperse: understanding species persistence in a changing world (2010, background): “Although these limitations of species–area relationships and bioenvelope models are recognized in the literature (Araújo & Luoto, 2007; Heikkinen et al., 2007), they are neglected in many global change studies.”
Species’ Distribution Modeling for Conservation Educators and Practitioners (2010, methodology): “For example, Heikkinen et al. (2007) used the distribution of woodpecker species to predict owl distributions in Finland since woodpeckers excavate cavities in trees that provide nesting sites for owls.”