ArticleEcology and evolution2016
Squares of different sizes: effect of geographical projection on model parameter estimates in species distribution modeling.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimating Area of Occupancy From Incomplete Occurrence Records: Reproducible Workflow Illustrated on a Comprehensive Dataset of Georgian Snakes.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Enhancing Species Distribution Models by Considering Dispersal Ability.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Using comparative extinction risk analysis to prioritize the IUCN Red List reassessments of amphibians.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2024Article
- Deep biogeographic barriers explain divergent global vertebrate communities.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Incorporating mesopelagic fish into the evaluation of conservation areas for marine living resources under climate change scenarios.Marine life science & technology · 2024Article
- Eco-ISEA3H, a machine learning ready spatial database for ecometric and species distribution modeling.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Global inequities and political borders challenge nature conservation under climate change.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Use of classical bird census transects as spatial replicates for hierarchical modeling of an avian community.Ecology and evolution · 2019Article
- Wrong, but useful: regional species distribution models may not be improved by range-wide data under biased sampling.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In species distribution analyses, environmental predictors and distribution data for large spatial extents are often available in long-lat format, such as degree raster grids. Long-lat projections suffer from unequal cell sizes, as a degree of longitude decreases in length from approximately 110 km at the equator to 0 km at the poles. Here we investigate whether long-lat and equal-area projections yield similar model parameter estimates, or result in a consistent bias. We analyzed the environmental effects on the distribution of 12 ungulate species with a northern distribution, as models for these species should display the strongest effect of projectional distortion. Additionally we choose four species with entirely continental distributions to investigate the effect of incomplete cell coverage at the coast. We expected that including model weights proportional to the actual cell area should compensate for the observed bias in model coefficients, and similarly that using land coverage of a cell should decrease bias in species with coastal distribution. As anticipated, model coefficients were different between long-lat and equal-area projections. Having progressively smaller and a higher number of cells with increasing latitude influenced the importance of parameters in models, increased the sample size for the northernmost parts of species ranges, and reduced the subcell variability of those areas. However, this bias could be largely removed by weighting long-lat cells by the area they cover, and marginally by correcting for land coverage. Overall we found little effect of using long-lat rather than equal-area projections in our analysis. The fitted relationship between environmental parameters and occurrence probability differed only very little between the two projection types. We still recommend using equal-area projections to avoid possible bias. More importantly, our results suggest that the cell area and the proportion of a cell covered by land should be used as a weight when analyzing distribution of terrestrial species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.