Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Identifying Core Areas in a Species’ Range Using Temporal Suitability Analysis: an Example Using Little Bustards Tetrax Tetrax L. in Spain

  • ORIGINAL PAPER
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Variations in habitat quality impact on breeding success, leading to strong selection pressure for the best sites to be occupied first during a population increase and last during a decline. Coupled with dispersal and metapopulation processes, the result is that snapshot surveys of wildlife distributions may fail to reveal core areas that conservation seeks to protect. At a local scale, territory occupancy is a good indicator of quality but data are not readily available to assess occupancy for rarer species, in remote areas, and over large spatial extents. We introduce temporal suitability analysis as a way to generate an analogue of occupancy from a single survey and illustrate it using data on the little bustard in Spain. We first used Generalised Additive Modelling (GAM) to build a predictive distribution model using Geographic Information System (GIS) coverages and satellite imagery, and then applied the model retrospectively to a time series of satellite images to produce one distribution map for each year. These annual maps differed in the extent of Spain predicted as suitable for little bustards. By overlaying the maps, we identified areas predicted as suitable in one to n years. We show that this temporal suitability map correlates with a conventional habitat suitability map based on a single year but contains extra information on hierarchical use of habitats and the lag between suitability and use. The technique may be applied at a variety of spatial scales to reveal changes in expected occupancy as land use or external factors determining land cover types vary over time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AUC:

Area under the curve (used for ROC plots)

AVHRR:

Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer

DTM:

Digital terrain model

GAM:

Generalised Additive Modelling

GLM:

Generalised Linear Modelling

GIS:

Geographic Information System

HSI:

Habitat Suitability Index

NDVI:

Normalised Difference Vegetation Index

ROC:

Receiver Operating Characteristics (curve)

References

  • Beck JB, Shultz EK (1986) The use of relative operating characteristic (ROC) curves in test performance evaluation. Arch Pathol Lab Med 110:13–20

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brotons L, Manosa S, Estrada J (2004) Modelling the effects of irrigation schemes on the distribution of steppe birds in Mediterranean farmland. Biodivers Conserv 13:1039–1058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JL (1969) The buffer effect and productivity in tit populations. Am Nat 103:347–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, Kodric-Brown A (1977) Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology 58:445–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckland ST, Elston DA (1993) Empirical models for the spatial distribution of wildlife. J Appl Ecol 30:478–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eastman JR (2000) Idrisi for windows. User’s guide version 32. Clark Labs, Clark University, Worcester, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Fielding AH, Bell JF (1997) A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ Conserv 24:38–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fielding AH, Haworth PF (1995) Testing the generality of bird–habitat models. Conserv Biol 9:1466–1481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fretwell SD, Lucas JHJ (1970) On territorial behaviour and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. Acta Biotheor 19:16–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves RH, Austin MP, Kaye PE (2003) Competition between Australian native and introduced grasses along a nutrient gradient. Austral Ecol 28:491–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guisan A, Hofer U (2003) Predicting reptile distributions at mesoscale: relation to climate and topography. J Biogeogr 30:1233–1243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guisan A, Zimmermann NE (2000) Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Model 135:147–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guisan A, Edwards TC, Hastie T (2002) Generalized linear and generalized additive models in studies of species distributions: setting the scene. Ecol Model 157:89–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Heegaard E, Birks HH, Gibson CE, Smith SJ, Wolfe-Murphy S (2001) Species-environmental relationships of aquatic macrophytes in Northern Ireland. Aquat Bot 70:175–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2003) Red list of threatened species. http://www.redlist.org. Downloaded on 08 October 2004

  • Jaberg C, Guisan A (2001) Modelling the distribution of bats in relation to landscape structure in a temperate mountain environment. J Appl Ecol 38:1169–1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokko H (1999) Competition for early arrival in migratory birds. J Anim Ecol 68:940–950

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krebs JR (1971) Territory and breeding density in the Great Tit, Parus major L. Ecology 52:1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leathwick JR, Austin MP (2001) Competitive interactions between tree species in New Zealand’s old-growth indigenous forests. Ecology 82:2560–2573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann A, Overton JM, Leathwick JR (2002) GRASP: generalized regression analysis and spatial prediction. Ecol Model 157:189–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maggini R, Guisan A, Cherix D (2002) A stratified approach for modeling the distribution of a threatened ant species in the Swiss National Park. Biodivers Conserv 11:2117–2141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manel S, Williams HC, Ormerod SJ (2001) Evaluating presence–absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence. J Appl Ecol 38:921–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martí R, del Moral JC (eds) (2003) Atlas de las Aves Reproductoras de España, Dirección General de Conservación de la Naturaleza. Sociedad Española de Ornitología, Madrid

  • Newton I (ed) (1989) Lifetime reproduction in birds. Academic Press, London

  • Nicholls AO (1989) How to make biological surveys go further with generalised linear models. Biol Conserv 50:51–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne PE, Alonso JC, Bryant RG (2001) Modelling landscape-scale habitat use using GIS and remote sensing: a case study with great bustards. J Appl Ecol 38:458–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne PE, Tigar BJ (1992) Interpreting bird atlas data using logistic models: an example from Lesotho, Southern Africa. J Appl Ecol 29:55–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce J, Ferrier S (2000a) An evaluation of alternative algorithms for fitting species distribution models using logistic regression. Ecol Model 128:127–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce J, Ferrier S (2000b) Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression. Ecol Model 133:225–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am Nat 132:652–661

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao CRN, Chen J (1995) Intersatellite calibration linkages for the visible and near-infrared channels of the advanced very high-resolution radiometer on the NOAA-7, NOAA-9, and NOAA-11 spacecraft. Int J Remote Sensing 16:1931–1942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seoane J, Bustamante J, Díaz-Delgado R (2004) Competing roles for landscape, vegetation, topography and climate in predictive models of bird distribution. Ecol Model 171:209–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sergio F, Newton I (2003) Occupancy as a measure of territory quality. J Anim Ecol 72:857–865

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva JP, Pinto M, Palmeirim JM (2004) Managing landscapes for the little bustard Tetrax tetrax: lessons from the study of winter habitat selection. Biol Conserv 117:521–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suárez-Seoane S, Osborne PE, Alonso JC (2002) Large-scale habitat selection by agricultural steppe birds in Spain: identifying species-habitat responses using generalised additive models. J Appl Ecol 39:755–771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira J, Arntzen JW (2002) Potential impact of climate warming on the distribution of the golden-striped salamander, Chioglossa lusitanica, on the Iberian Peninsula. Biodivers Conserv 11:2167–2176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Horne B (1983) Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality. J Wildlife Manage 47:893–901

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venables WN, Ripley BD (1999) Modern applied statistics with S-Plus. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittingham MJ, Wilson JD, Donald PF (2003) Do habitat association models have any generality? Predicting skylark Alauda arvensis abundance in different regions of southern England. Ecography 26:521–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wint WGR, Robinson TP, Bourn DM, Durr PA, Hay SI, Radolph SE, Rogers DJ (2002) Mapping bovine tuberculosis in Great Britain using environmental data. Trends Microbiol 10:441–444

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff A, Paul J-P, Martin J-L, Bretagnolle V (2001) The benefits of extensive agriculture to birds: the case of the little bustard. J Appl Ecol 38:963–975

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann NE, Kienast F (1999) Predictive mapping of alpine grasslands in Switzerland: species versus community approach. J Veget Sci 10:469–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the many people who provided us with distribution data for the little bustard in Spain. The AVHRR data were provided by NERC’s Satellite Receiving Station at Dundee and were processed by the RSDAS, Plymouth. We especially wish to thank Neil Lonie and Luke Tudor for their help, and Tim Smyth for carrying out the corrections for filter degradation. Thanks are also due to Pilar García for help in building the DTM in INDUROT (Universidad de Oviedo). Susana Suárez-Seoane was funded through a Marie Curie postdoctoral fellowship under EC programme ENV4-CT98-5130.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Environmental Sciences, School of Civil Engineering and the Environment University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK

    Patrick E. Osborne

  2. Area de Ecología, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas y Ambientales, Universidad de León, Campus de Vegazana, s/n. 24071, León, Spain

    Susana Suárez-Seoane

Authors
  1. Patrick E. Osborne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susana Suárez-Seoane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick E. Osborne.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Osborne, P.E., Suárez-Seoane, S. Identifying Core Areas in a Species’ Range Using Temporal Suitability Analysis: an Example Using Little Bustards Tetrax Tetrax L. in Spain. Biodivers Conserv 16, 3505–3518 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-006-9058-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-006-9058-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation