Science Advances

Supplementary Materials

This PDF file includes:

  • Supplementary Text
  • Text S1. Uses of models in biodiversity assessments.
  • Text S2. Guidelines for scoring models in biodiversity assessments.
  • Text S2.1. Guidelines for the response variable.
  • Text S2.1A. Sampling of response variables.
  • Text S2.1B. Identification of taxa.
  • Text S2.1C. Spatial accuracy of response variable.
  • Text S2.1D. Environmental extent across which response variable is sampled.
  • Text S2.1E. Geographic extent across which response variable is sampled (includes occurrence data and absence, pseudo-absence, or background data).
  • Text S2.2. Guidelines for the predictor variables.
  • Text S2.2A. Selection of candidate variables.
  • Text S2.2B. Spatial and temporal resolution of predictor variables.
  • Text S2.2C. Uncertainty in predictor variables.
  • Text S2.3. Guidelines for model building.
  • Text S2.3A. Model complexity.
  • Text S2.3B. Treatment of bias and noise in response variables.
  • Text S2.3C. Treatment of collinearity.
  • Text S2.3D. Dealing with modeling and parameter uncertainty.
  • Text S2.4. Guidelines for model evaluation.
  • Text S2.4A. Evaluation of model assumptions.
  • Text S2.4B. Evaluation of model outputs.
  • Text S2.4C. Measures of model performance.
  • Text S3. Scoring a representative sample of the literature according to the guidelines.
  • Text S4. Glossary.
  • Fig. S1.1. Classification of 400 randomly sampled papers applying SDMs to biodiversity assessments according to the number and taxonomic group of species modeled.
  • Fig. S1.2. Classification of 400 randomly sampled papers applying SDMs to biodiversity assessments according to the continent and ecological realm of focus.
  • Fig. S1.3. Accumulated percentage of papers reviewed falling in different classes as the size of the random sample is increased.
  • Fig. S1.4. The continents used to classify papers applying SDMs to biodiversity assessments.
  • Fig. S1.5. Frequencies of scores of different categories of issues assessed.
  • Fig. S1.6. Differences between scores obtained in the first assessment of the studies and the second independent reevaluation by a different assessor.
  • Fig. S1.7. Changes in species distribution modeling standards over time (1995–2015).
  • Fig. S1.8. Magnitude of standard deviations (0, no error; 1, maximum error) between first and second independent scoring of the studies over annual steps for each aspect and issue judged.
  • Table S1.1. Search terms used to select papers for the literature characterization.
  • Table S1.2. Classification of the purpose for which SDMs are used.
  • Table S1.3. Classification of the conservation applications of SDMs.
  • Table S2.1. Guidelines—Response variable.
  • Table S2.2. Guidelines—Predictor variables.
  • Table S2.3. Guidelines—Model building.
  • Table S2.4. Guidelines—Model evaluation.
  • Table S3.1. Search terms used to select papers using SDMs for biodiversity assessments, for the purpose of scoring according to the guidelines.

Download PDF

 

Correction (11 April 2019): The sources mentioned in the Supplementary Materials were mistakenly omitted in the original publication. The PDF and HTML versions of the paper were updated to include these sources in the manuscript�s reference list.

The original version is accessible here.

Files in this Data Supplement: