ArticleEcology and evolution2025
When Do Single-Species Occupancy Models Outperform Multispecies Models?
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- When Do Single-Species Occupancy Models Outperform Multispecies Models?Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
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
Occupancy models have become increasingly popular for species monitoring and assessment, in part, because detection/non-detection data are readily obtained using a variety of methods. Multispecies occupancy models (MSOMs) can yield more accurate parameter estimates than single-species models (SSOMs) with less data through their hierarchical structure, making MSOMs an attractive option when species are hard to detect or when data collection is constrained, leading to sparse datasets. Such constraints may arise from limited sampling resources, but also occur in rare species monitoring or where preliminary results are desired to inform adaptive management. Further, experimental habitat treatments often impose spatial constraints on sampling based on the scale of their implementation. Whether a MSOM outperforms SSOMs depends on the volume of data, characteristics of the ecological community, research goals of a study and how these factors align with modeling assumptions. We performed a simulation study of hypothetical pollinator communities under varying sampling intensities for scenarios in which experimental habitat treatments produced different community-level effects. We fit occupancy models to simulated datasets and assessed model performance. At lower sampling intensities (< 20 spatial replicates and < 4 temporal replicates), MSOM community-level treatment effect estimates were biased. Even at twice this sampling intensity, SSOMs yielded more accurate species-specific effect estimates in treatment effect scenarios with high variance. In some cases, MSOMs can pull species in the tails of distributions too far toward the community mean effect, which risks incorrect conclusions concerning whether treatments help or harm individual species. When quantifying species-specific effects is the main objective, particularly for rarely observed species, SSOMs are more robust to outliers across a range of community response scenarios. Researchers can use this information to inform study design, guide simulation studies and decide whether the higher precision of MSOMs outweighs risks of improperly estimated effects for some 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.