ArticleEcology and evolution2023
How does spatial extent and environmental limits affect the accuracy of species richness estimates from ecological niche models? A case study with North American Pinaceae and Cactaceae.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Climate change reshapes habitat suitability of ancient tea trees in Yunnan: insights from an optimized MaxEnt model.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Potential planting regions ofEcology and evolution · 2024Article
- How does spatial extent and environmental limits affect the accuracy of species richness estimates from ecological niche models? A case study with North American Pinaceae and Cactaceae.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measuring species richness at varying spatial extents can be challenging, especially at large extents where exhaustive species surveys are difficult or impossible. Our work aimed at determining the reliability of species richness estimates from stacked ecological niche models at different spatial extents for taxonomic groups with vastly different environmental dependencies and interactions. To accomplish this, we generated ecological niche models for the species of Cactaceae and Pinaceae that occur within 180 published floras from North America north of Mexico. We overlaid or stacked the resulting species' potential distribution estimates over the bounding boxes representing each of the 180 floras to generate predictions of species richness. In general, our stacked models of Cactaceae and Pinaceae were poor predictors of species richness. The relationships between observed and predicted values improved noticeably with the size of spatial extents. However, the stacked models tended to overpredict the richness of Cactaceae and over- and underpredict the richness of Pinaceae. Cactaceae stacked models showed higher sensitivity and lower specificity than those for Pinaceae. We conclude that stacked ecological niche models may be somewhat poor predictors of species richness at smaller spatial extents and should be used with caution for this purpose. Perhaps more importantly, abilities to compensate for their limitations or apply corrections to their reliability may vary with taxonomic groups.
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.