Submit a preprint

100

How citizen science could improve Species Distribution Models and their independent assessmentuse asterix (*) to get italics
Florence Matutini, Jacques Baudry, Guillaume Pain, Morgane Sineau, Josephine PithonPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
2020
<p>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.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4043460You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4043460You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4043460You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Amphibians, biodiversity conservation, data filtering, data culling, external evaluation, habitat suitability modelling, sampling effort
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Biodiversity, Biogeography, Conservation biology, Habitat selection, Spatial ecology, Metacommunities & Metapopulations, Species distributions, Statistical ecology
No need for them to be recommenders of PCIEcology. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe [john@doe.com]
2020-06-03 09:36:34
Francisco Lloret