| Summary: | Models that predict distribution are now widely used to understand the patterns and processes of plant and animal occurrence as well as to guide conservation and management of rare or threatened species. Application of these methods has led to corresponding studies evaluating the sensitivity of model performance to requisite data and other factors that may lead to imprecise or false inferences. We expand upon these works by providing a relative measure of the sensitivity of model parameters and prediction to common sources of error, bias, and variability. We used a one-at-a-time sample design and GPS location data for woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) to assess one common species-distribution model: a resource selection function. Our measures of sensitivity included change in coefficient values, prediction success, and the area of mapped habitats following the systematic introduction of geographic error and bias in occurrence data, thematic misclassification of resource maps, and variation in model design. Results suggested that error, bias and model variation have a large impact on the direct interpretation of coefficients. Prediction success and definition of important habitats were less responsive to the perturbations we introduced to the baseline model. Model coefficients, prediction success, and area of ranked habitats were most sensitive to positional error in species locations followed by sampling bias, misclassification of resources, and variation in model design. We recommend that researchers report, and practitioners consider, levels of error and bias introduced to predictive species-distribution models. Formal sensitivity and uncertainty analyses are the most effective means for evaluating and focusing improvements on input data and considering the range of values possible from imperfect models. GPS; Radiotelemetry; Resource selection function; Sensitivity analysis; Species distribution; Woodland caribou;
|
|---|