Data and code from: Thresholding species distribution models: Simple approaches for land-use planning in multifunctional landscapes
Data files
Nov 27, 2025 version files 1.82 MB
-
README.md
2.70 KB
-
Supplement_S1.pdf
84.50 KB
-
Supplement_S2.pdf
200.34 KB
-
Supplement_S3.csv
357.46 KB
-
Supplement_S4.pdf
635.80 KB
-
Supplement_S5.pdf
489.04 KB
-
Supplement_S6.pdf
52.17 KB
Abstract
Species distribution models (SDMs) are often used to understand changes to species’ distributions and their habitats under different land-use scenarios, enabling decision-makers to prioritize areas for management efforts and balance environmental conservation with socio-economic demands on the landscape. However, application of SDMs in land-use planning and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) remains limited due to challenges in interpreting and communicating continuous predictions resulting from these SDMs. Although different binarization methods have been used to overcome such challenges, the choice of threshold can profoundly alter the resulting binary habitat map, and most methods lack simplicity and require access to underlying species occurrence and environmental data used to develop the SDMs. Hence, there is a demand for testing simple alternative binarization methods to enable in-house application of SDMs by practitioners and to facilitate interpretation and communication. Using SDMs of 103 boreal bird species in Alberta, Canada, we transform species relative abundance predictions of SDMs into direct estimates of habitat area, a proxy for habitat suitability, using four simple and three complex thresholding methods. We compare the performance of the binarized models for each bird species and between forest specialists vs. generalists under land-use change scenarios. We found that thresholded models reflect losses in suitable habitat under industrial disturbance scenarios more realistically compared to continuous relative abundance models. Notably, simple thresholding methods, particularly the mean predicted relative abundance, performed similarly to complex thresholding methods in predicting suitable habitat areas, and as indicated by model evaluations using the area under the curve. These findings suggest that using the mean as a binarization threshold can effectively bridge the gap between complex SDMs and their application in policy and planning, without sacrificing predictive accuracy. We conclude that simple threshold binarization methods, such as the mean, can leverage the strong predictive power of SDMs to provide insights into future changes in species’ habitat during land-use planning scenarios, account for their uncertainties, and expand their utility to facilitate interpretation for science-informed decision-making in multifunctional landscapes.
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.3j9kd51wk
Description of the data and file structure
Files and variables
File: Supplement_S1.pdf
Description:
Details on ABMI bird species distribution models.
File: Supplement_S2.pdf
Description:
Threshold values and percent of habitat suitability selected from the seven binarization thresholding methods to transform estimate of relative abundance into area of suitable habitat for all 103 bird species.
File: Supplement_S3.csv
Description:
Data file (Supplement_S2.csv) containing the individual species responses (AUC scores) under habitat loss scenarios.
Variables
- ser: a unique identifier (serial number) of models
- Disturbance: Ranging from 0-100 % and present the percent of urban-industry per cell.
- Model: All 103 birds. Models are identified by bird's common name.
- Method: Full, full model; Modified, modified model (urban-industry coefficient =0), mean (𝜇), median (md), 75th percentile (p75), 90th percentile (p90), maximum sum of sensitivity and specificity (mss), sensitivity equals specificity (ses), and minimum ROC distance (mrd).
- values: AUC scores for all models
File: Supplement_S4.pdf
Description:
AUC scores ± SD, and 95 % CI for the contentious and modified models, and seven thresholding methods for 103 bird species.
File: Supplement_S5.pdf
Description:
Pairwise multiple comparison showing differences in AUC scores with 95 % confidence intervals for each model pair across all 103 birds, and per functional group (77 forest generalists and 26 specialists).
File: Supplement_S6.pdf
Description:
Percent difference in delineated suitable habitat resulting from bootstrapping of bird models.
Software files hosted by Zenodo
Folder: Abdel_Moniem_et_al_2025_SDMs_thresholds_Code.zip 5.75 MB
Description:
- R code: SDMs-LUP, contains code needed for map figures
- Folder: Analysis, contains 3 subfolders:
- data: contains species lookups and sahpefiles folder 'nsr'
- R: contains several R functions needed for the analysis
- src: R script for analysis and model validation at different scales.
Access information
Other publicly accessible locations of the data:
Data was derived from the following sources:
- Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (ABMI)
