Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

How citizen science could improve Species Distribution Models and their independent assessment

Matutini Florence, Baudry Jacques, Pain Guillaume, Sineau Morgane, Pithon Joséphine
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.02.129536
Matutini Florence
1BAGAP, INRAE, Institut Agro, ESA - Angers, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: Florence.matutini@gmail.com
Baudry Jacques
2BAGAP, INRAE, Institut Agro, ESA - Rennes, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Pain Guillaume
1BAGAP, INRAE, Institut Agro, ESA - Angers, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sineau Morgane
3URCPIE Pays de la Loire - Nantes, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Pithon Joséphine
1BAGAP, INRAE, Institut Agro, ESA - Angers, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Species distribution models (SDM) have been increasingly developed in recent years but their validity is questioned. Their assessment can be improved by the use of independent data but this can be difficult to obtain and prohibitive to collect. Standardized data from citizen science may be used to establish external evaluation datasets and to improve SDM validation and applicability. We used opportunistic presence-only data along with presence-absence data from a standardized citizen science program to establish and assess habitat suitability maps for 9 species of amphibian in western France. We assessed Generalized Additive and Random Forest Models’ performance by (1) cross-validation using 30% of the opportunistic dataset used to calibrate the model or (2) external validation using different independent data sets derived from citizen science monitoring. We tested the effects of applying different combinations of filters to the citizen data and of complementing it with additional standardized fieldwork. Cross-validation with an internal evaluation dataset resulted in higher AUC (Area Under the receiver operating Curve) than external evaluation causing overestimation of model accuracy and did not select the same models; models integrating sampling effort performed better with external validation. AUC, specificity and sensitivity of models calculated with different filtered external datasets differed for some species. However, for most species, complementary fieldwork was not necessary to obtain coherent results, as long as the citizen science data was strongly filtered. Since external validation methods using independent data are considered more robust, filtering data from citizen sciences may make a valuable contribution to the assessment of SDM. Limited complementary fieldwork with volunteer’s participation to complete ecological gradients may also possibly enhance citizen involvement and lead to better use of SDM in decision processes for nature conservation.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Footnotes

  • This article has been peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Ecology, https://doi.org/10.24072/pci.ecology.100059

  • Cite as: Matutini, F., Baudry, J., Pain, G., Sineau, M. and Pithon, J. (2020) How citizen science could improve Species Distribution Models and their independent assessment. bioRxiv, 2020.06.02.129536, ver. 4 peer-reviewed and recommended by PCI Ecology. doi: 10.1101/2020.06.02.129536

  • Version 4 of this preprint has been peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community In Ecology (https://doi.org/10.24072/pci.ecology.100059)

  • https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4043460

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted September 22, 2020.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
How citizen science could improve Species Distribution Models and their independent assessment
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
How citizen science could improve Species Distribution Models and their independent assessment
Matutini Florence, Baudry Jacques, Pain Guillaume, Sineau Morgane, Pithon Joséphine
bioRxiv 2020.06.02.129536; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.02.129536
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
How citizen science could improve Species Distribution Models and their independent assessment
Matutini Florence, Baudry Jacques, Pain Guillaume, Sineau Morgane, Pithon Joséphine
bioRxiv 2020.06.02.129536; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.02.129536

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Ecology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4109)
  • Biochemistry (8813)
  • Bioengineering (6517)
  • Bioinformatics (23456)
  • Biophysics (11788)
  • Cancer Biology (9205)
  • Cell Biology (13318)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7433)
  • Ecology (11407)
  • Epidemiology (2066)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15145)
  • Genetics (10433)
  • Genomics (14041)
  • Immunology (9169)
  • Microbiology (22152)
  • Molecular Biology (8808)
  • Neuroscience (47558)
  • Paleontology (350)
  • Pathology (1428)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2491)
  • Physiology (3730)
  • Plant Biology (8079)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1437)
  • Synthetic Biology (2220)
  • Systems Biology (6037)
  • Zoology (1252)