Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41028132›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Species habitat modeling based on image semantic segmentation.

Lingjun Wang, Haofeng Tan, Peng Luo, Liqiu Meng, Teng Fei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Lingjun WangSchool of Resource and Environmental Sciences, Wuhan University, No.129, Luoyu Road, Wuhan, 430079, Hubei, China.
Haofeng TanDepartment of Geography, University of South Carolina, Columbia, 29208, USA.
Peng LuoChair of Cartography and Visual Analytics, Technical University of Munich, 80333, Munich, Germany.
Liqiu MengChair of Cartography and Visual Analytics, Technical University of Munich, 80333, Munich, Germany.
Teng FeiSchool of Resource and Environmental Sciences, Wuhan University, No.129, Luoyu Road, Wuhan, 430079, Hubei, China. feiteng@whu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Habitat monitoring has emerged as a crucial practice for preserving ecological environments and ensuring species reproduction. Traditional habitat modeling often relies on the "lasagna model"-a McHarg-style approach that focuses on the ecological niche formed by the combined effect of multiple geographical factors at a single location. This model, however, overlooks the influence of the broader surrounding environment on habitat suitability. In this study, we propose a habitat modeling framework that integrates surrounding environmental conditions by employing kernel density analysis and a semantic segmentation method. The results demonstrate that kernel density analysis is effective in expanding the presence-only data into presence-absence data for habitat modeling. The semantic segmentation method, Segformer, outperforms the traditional MaxEnt in mapping the habitat of the Sandpiper family in Taiwan, achieving a higher Area Under the Curve (AUC) score (0.76 vs. 0.69). Another case study of the Swallow family indicates the limitations of the proposed method. This study highlights the potential of applying deep learning methods to habitat modeling, contributing to more comprehensive biodiversity assessments and conservation planning.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemModels, TheoreticalAnimalsBiodiversityBirdsDeep LearningSemanticsTaiwanDeep learningKernel density analysisSemantic segmentationSpecies distribution models

Identifiers

PMID41028132
PMCPMC12485057

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.