Publication Details |
| Category | Text Publication |
| Reference Category | Journals |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02659.x |
| Document | Shareable Link |
| Title (Primary) | Correlation and process in species distribution models: bridging a dichotomy |
| Author | Dormann, C.F.; Schymanski, S.J.; Cabral, J.; Chuine, I.; Graham, C.; Hartig, F.; Kearney, M.; Morin, X.; Römermann, C.; Schröder, B.; Singer, A. |
| Journal | Journal of Biogeography |
| Year | 2012 |
| Department | CLE; OESA |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue | 12 |
| Page From | 2119 |
| Page To | 2131 |
| Language | englisch |
| Keywords | Hypothesis generation; mechanistic model; parameterization; process-based model; species distribution model; SDM; uncertainty; validation |
| Abstract | Within the field of species distribution modelling an apparent dichotomy
exists between process-based and correlative approaches, where the
processes are explicit in the former and implicit in the latter.
However, these intuitive distinctions can become blurred when comparing
species distribution modelling approaches in more detail. In this review
article, we contrast the extremes of the correlative–process spectrum
of species distribution models with respect to core assumptions, model
building and selection strategies, validation, uncertainties, common
errors and the questions they are most suited to answer. The extremes of
such approaches differ clearly in many aspects, such as model building
approaches, parameter estimation strategies and transferability.
However, they also share strengths and weaknesses. We show that claims
of one approach being intrinsically superior to the other are misguided
and that they ignore the process–correlation continuum as well as the
domains of questions that each approach is addressing. Nonetheless, the
application of process-based approaches to species distribution
modelling lags far behind more correlative (process-implicit) methods
and more research is required to explore their potential benefits.
Critical issues for the employment of species distribution modelling
approaches are given, together with a guideline for appropriate usage.
We close with challenges for future development of process-explicit
species distribution models and how they may complement current
approaches to study species distributions. |
| Persistent UFZ Identifier | https://www.ufz.de/index.php?en=20939&ufzPublicationIdentifier=12054 |
| Dormann, C.F., Schymanski, S.J., Cabral, J., Chuine, I., Graham, C., Hartig, F., Kearney, M., Morin, X., Römermann, C., Schröder, B., Singer, A. (2012): Correlation and process in species distribution models: bridging a dichotomy J. Biogeogr. 39 (12), 2119 - 2131 |
|