School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4
-
ItemIdentifying technology solutions to bring conservation into the innovation era(WILEY, 2019-12)Innovation has the potential to enable conservation science and practice to keep pace with the escalating threats to global biodiversity, but this potential will only be realized if such innovations are designed and developed to fulfill specific needs and solve well‐defined conservation problems. We propose that business‐world strategies for assessing the practicality of innovation can be applied to assess the viability of innovations, such as new technology, for addressing biodiversity conservation challenges. Here, we outline a five‐step, “lean start‐up” based approach for considering conservation innovation from a business‐planning perspective. Then, using three prominent conservation initiatives – Marxan (software), Conservation Drones (technology support), and Mataki (wildlife‐tracking devices) – as case studies, we show how considering proposed initiatives from the perspective of a conceptual business model can support innovative technologies in achieving desired conservation outcomes.
-
ItemForecasting species range dynamics with process-explicit models: matching methods to applications(WILEY, 2019-11)Knowing where species occur is fundamental to many ecological and environmental applications. Species distribution models (SDMs) are typically based on correlations between species occurrence data and environmental predictors, with ecological processes captured only implicitly. However, there is a growing interest in approaches that explicitly model processes such as physiology, dispersal, demography and biotic interactions. These models are believed to offer more robust predictions, particularly when extrapolating to novel conditions. Many process-explicit approaches are now available, but it is not clear how we can best draw on this expanded modelling toolbox to address ecological problems and inform management decisions. Here, we review a range of process-explicit models to determine their strengths and limitations, as well as their current use. Focusing on four common applications of SDMs - regulatory planning, extinction risk, climate refugia and invasive species - we then explore which models best meet management needs. We identify barriers to more widespread and effective use of process-explicit models and outline how these might be overcome. As well as technical and data challenges, there is a pressing need for more thorough evaluation of model predictions to guide investment in method development and ensure the promise of these new approaches is fully realised.
-
ItemSpatially explicit power analysis for detecting occupancy trends for multiple species(WILEY, 2019-09)Assessing the statistical power to detect changes in wildlife populations is a crucial yet often overlooked step when designing and evaluating monitoring programs. Here, we developed a simulation framework to perform spatially explicit statistical power analysis of biological monitoring programs for detecting temporal trends in occupancy for multiple species. Using raster layers representing the spatial variation in current occupancy and species-level detectability for one or multiple observation methods, our framework simulates changes in occupancy over space and time, with the capacity to explicitly model stochastic disturbances at monitoring sites (i.e., dynamic landscapes). Once users specify the number and location of sites, the frequency and duration of surveys, and the type of detection method(s) for each species, our framework estimates power to detect occupancy trends, both across the landscape and/or within nested management units. As a case study, we evaluated the power of a long-term monitoring program to detect trends in occupancy for 136 species (83 birds, 33 reptiles, and 20 mammals) across and within Kakadu, Litchfield, and Nitmiluk National Parks in northern Australia. We assumed continuation of an original monitoring design implemented since 1996, with the addition of camera trapping. As expected, power to detect trends was sensitive to the direction and magnitude of the change in occupancy, detectability, initial occupancy levels, and the rarity of species. Our simulations suggest that monitoring has at least an 80% chance at detecting a 50% decline in occupancy for 22% of the modeled species across the three parks over the next 15 yr. Monitoring is more likely to detect increasing occupancy trends, with at least an 80% chance at detecting a 50% increase in 87% of species. The addition of camera-trapping increased average power to detect a 50% decline in mammals compared with using only live trapping by 63%. We provide a flexible tool that can help decision-makers design and evaluate monitoring programs for hundreds of species at a time in a range of ecological settings, while explicitly considering the distribution of species and alternative sampling methods.
-
ItemModel averaging in ecology: a review of Bayesian, information-theoretic, and tactical approaches for predictive inference(WILEY, 2018-11)Abstract In ecology, the true causal structure for a given problem is often not known, and several plausible models and thus model predictions exist. It has been claimed that using weighted averages of these models can reduce prediction error, as well as better reflect model selection uncertainty. These claims, however, are often demonstrated by isolated examples. Analysts must better understand under which conditions model averaging can improve predictions and their uncertainty estimates. Moreover, a large range of different model averaging methods exists, raising the question of how they differ in their behaviour and performance. Here, we review the mathematical foundations of model averaging along with the diversity of approaches available. We explain that the error in model‐averaged predictions depends on each model's predictive bias and variance, as well as the covariance in predictions between models, and uncertainty about model weights. We show that model averaging is particularly useful if the predictive error of contributing model predictions is dominated by variance, and if the covariance between models is low. For noisy data, which predominate in ecology, these conditions will often be met. Many different methods to derive averaging weights exist, from Bayesian over information‐theoretical to cross‐validation optimized and resampling approaches. A general recommendation is difficult, because the performance of methods is often context dependent. Importantly, estimating weights creates some additional uncertainty. As a result, estimated model weights may not always outperform arbitrary fixed weights, such as equal weights for all models. When averaging a set of models with many inadequate models, however, estimating model weights will typically be superior to equal weights. We also investigate the quality of the confidence intervals calculated for model‐averaged predictions, showing that they differ greatly in behaviour and seldom manage to achieve nominal coverage. Our overall recommendations stress the importance of non‐parametric methods such as cross‐validation for a reliable uncertainty quantification of model‐averaged predictions.