2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2008.08.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predictive modeling and mapping sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) nesting habitat using Maximum Entropy and a long-term dataset from Southern Oregon

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
93
1
2

Year Published

2009
2009
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 130 publications
(99 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
93
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Both sets of records were used once HMF map was obtained, to compare how well the data fi t such a map. (Yost et al, 2008): (1) MaxEnt (Phillips et al, 2006) was run using the 56 covariates, (2) the gain values were extracted from the Jackknife validation test and a mean test (95% signifi cance level) was applied to determine their confi dence intervals, (3) the covariates with values higher than the upper maximum of the confi dence interval were selected, and (4) a second MaxEnt analysis was run only using the selected covariates (in step 3). Each run in Maxent used the records of the 78 species selected as characteristic of HMF.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both sets of records were used once HMF map was obtained, to compare how well the data fi t such a map. (Yost et al, 2008): (1) MaxEnt (Phillips et al, 2006) was run using the 56 covariates, (2) the gain values were extracted from the Jackknife validation test and a mean test (95% signifi cance level) was applied to determine their confi dence intervals, (3) the covariates with values higher than the upper maximum of the confi dence interval were selected, and (4) a second MaxEnt analysis was run only using the selected covariates (in step 3). Each run in Maxent used the records of the 78 species selected as characteristic of HMF.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The variable resulting in the lowest drop in gain can be considered the most redundant as its power to fit to the data is compensated for by the remaining variables. Following Yost et al (2008), I ran the jackknife test using 10 random partitions of the dependent data (70% training, 30% testing), with randomised selection of background cells (i.e. predictor data).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An alternative method for assessing variable importance is the jackknife approach [11,12]. This approach excludes one variable at a time when running the model.…”
Section: Variable Responsementioning
confidence: 99%