2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmb.2017.03.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diferencias conceptuales entre modelación de nichos y modelación de áreas de distribución

Abstract: Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad www.ib.unam.mx/revista/ Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 88 (2017) 437-441 Nota de opinión Diferencias conceptuales entre modelación de nichos y modelación de áreas de distribución Conceptual differences between ecological niche modeling and species distribution modeling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
32
0
15

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 79 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
(23 reference statements)
1
32
0
15
Order By: Relevance
“…The limited knowledge of these species' dispersion or fossil records combined with the great fragmentation and degradation of the environments they inhabit (Pelegrin et al, 2009(Pelegrin et al, , 2013Pelegrin & Bucher, 2012), leads us to think that some of the suitable climate spaces predicted in our results for temporal scenarios remains uncertain whether they can be occupied or not (Araújo & New, 2007;Colwell & Rangel, 2009). Despite this, past or future impacts of climate change keep a moderate uncertainty level being influenced by interactions and effects of biotic, abiotic, and dispersal considerations (Townsend Peterson, Papeş & Soberón, 2016), the robustness of the models presented here were supported by the definition of the segment (i.e., Grinnelian) of the niche studied (Soberón, Osorio-Olvera & Peterson, 2017) and by the use of open algorithms which explains in detail their calculations (Phillips et al, 2017). These constraints of employed models could be mitigated and provide accurate forecasts of the lost-gain of the suitable geographic and climate spaces with a good sample of species presences and correct methodological choices, which increase the certainty of the predictions (Radosavljevic & Anderson, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The limited knowledge of these species' dispersion or fossil records combined with the great fragmentation and degradation of the environments they inhabit (Pelegrin et al, 2009(Pelegrin et al, , 2013Pelegrin & Bucher, 2012), leads us to think that some of the suitable climate spaces predicted in our results for temporal scenarios remains uncertain whether they can be occupied or not (Araújo & New, 2007;Colwell & Rangel, 2009). Despite this, past or future impacts of climate change keep a moderate uncertainty level being influenced by interactions and effects of biotic, abiotic, and dispersal considerations (Townsend Peterson, Papeş & Soberón, 2016), the robustness of the models presented here were supported by the definition of the segment (i.e., Grinnelian) of the niche studied (Soberón, Osorio-Olvera & Peterson, 2017) and by the use of open algorithms which explains in detail their calculations (Phillips et al, 2017). These constraints of employed models could be mitigated and provide accurate forecasts of the lost-gain of the suitable geographic and climate spaces with a good sample of species presences and correct methodological choices, which increase the certainty of the predictions (Radosavljevic & Anderson, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…We evaluated changes in the environmental space for each of the species considering state is a complex system that involves interactions for more than two variables and can be described as an n -dimensional cloud of points or an n -dimensional hypervolume (Soberón, Osorio-Olvera & Peterson, 2017). If these environmental space conditions are disturbed, it might lead these variables to take other values and to produce a different n -dimensional hypervolume;…”
Section: Envirnnmental Space and N -Dimensinnal Hypervnlgmesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Se conoce que la fragmentación de un ecosistema provoca una pérdida de diversidad genética (Hardesty et al, 2010), porque los árboles quedan distanciados y esto afecta directamente el flujo génico, además de incrementar los niveles de endogamia con la consecuente pérdida de vigor y viabilidad de las generaciones poblacionales posteriores (Thomas et al, 2017). En este estudio se muestra la presencia histórica y actual de O. macrocalyx en regiones particulares, así como las condiciones abióticas y bióticas favorables en las que se encontraba y/o se encuentra, factores que determinan causalmente su área de distribución (Soberón et al, 2017). Hay necesidad de continuar con un trabajo de colecta mayor para definir su categoría de riesgo actual, complementando con estudios sobre la diversidad genética de sus poblaciones, mediante marcadores moleculares (Dick y Kress, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Actualmente con el desarrollo tecnológico de software y de instrumentos eficaces de investigación en campo, como las cámaras trampa de activado automático para la toma de fotografías o videos al paso de los animales (Rovero et al 2013, Gallina 2017, y la toma directa de información como la grabación de voces, asimismo, la elaboración de técnicas sofisticadas para la obtención de muestras, por ejemplo, para estudios genéticos y moleculares, y el modelado de áreas de distribución a través de sistemas de información geográfica (Soberón et al 2017), han facilitado extraordinariamente el trabajo en campo. En ese sentido la tecnología se ha convertido en una herramienta indispensable para el estudio y reconocimiento de la biodiversidad (Rovero et al 2013).…”
Section: Discussionunclassified