Published April 19, 2024 | Version v1
Dataset Open

Choosing predictors and complexity for ecosystem distribution models: effects on performance and transferability

  • 1. University of Oslo
  • 2. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research

Description

There is an increasing need for ecosystem-level distribution models (EDMs) and a better understanding of which factors affect their quality. We investigated how the performance and transferability of EDMs are influenced by (1) the choice of predictors, and (2) model complexity. We modelled the distribution of 15 pre-classified ecosystem types in Norway using 252 predictors gridded to 100 m × 100 m resolution. The ecosystem types are major types in the "Nature in Norway" system mainly defined by rule-based criteria such as whether soil or specific functional groups (e.g., trees) are present. The predictors were categorised into four groups, of which three represented proxies for natural, anthropogenic, or terrain processes ('ecological predictors') and one represented spectral and structural characteristics of the surface observable from above ('surface predictors'). Models were generated for five levels of model complexity. Model performance and transferability were evaluated with data collected independently of the training data. We found that (1) models trained with surface predictors only, performed considerably better and were more transferable than models trained with ecological predictors, and (2) model performance increased with model complexity, levelling off from around 10 parameters and reaching a peak around 20 parameters, while model transferability decreased with model complexity. Our findings support that surface predictors enhance EDM performance and transferability, most likely because they represent discernible surface characteristics of the ecosystem types. A poor match between the rule-based criteria that define the ecosystem types and the ecological predictors, which represent ecological processes, is a plausible explanation for why surface predictors better predict the distribution of ecosystem types. Our results indicate that, in most cases, the same models are not well suited focontrasting purposes, such as predicting where ecosystems are and explaining why they are there.

Notes

Funding provided by: The Research Council of Norway
Crossref Funder Registry ID: https://ror.org/00epmv149
Award Number: 320602

Files

README.md

Files (2.3 GB)

Name Size Download all
md5:7b02413432c7c5f14612102d09bb38fe
871 Bytes Preview Download
md5:dd05993f294878781cc351b476f199c9
159.3 MB Preview Download
md5:870eb1e6abe4a20fc78acdb0835f41e4
172.6 MB Preview Download
md5:b6a5a31ed3d206c0ee6d0e5e7039bb39
152.1 MB Preview Download
md5:8e47175cef3a155ba9a25a2abb33dd16
130.2 MB Preview Download
md5:a52be76af09764e3042071f758d48377
156.7 MB Preview Download
md5:8bdb6b87b30dba9187b4df7c9b785b69
157.5 MB Preview Download
md5:4f9261d3c4a06e306f357190675237d9
92.5 MB Preview Download
md5:0493e72f9b283fb3937ad2778b815537
159.9 MB Preview Download
md5:d72ca35579b19f96a81e69040330cc4c
167.5 MB Preview Download
md5:848dbb71376320a5132b0ddab32f9e47
171.9 MB Preview Download
md5:2a6bc32f5cf3d337622a9500264cc3b0
149.2 MB Preview Download
md5:2c5616aa4e8d88d2fde06dab0e141e85
136.1 MB Preview Download
md5:aa5b6a9a75c9b1e988bd9d1af7da4933
153.6 MB Preview Download
md5:37bc9add39c6781f61e8d4d38e364334
174.1 MB Preview Download
md5:0b3d20a66ffa510bbad93f87aa959f94
172.4 MB Preview Download