Landscape Ecology

, Volume 33, Issue 2, pp 257–274 | Cite as

Modeling relative habitat suitability of southern Florida for invasive Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus)

  • Holly E. Mutascio
  • Shannon E. Pittman
  • Patrick A. Zollner
  • Laura E. D’Acunto
Research Article
  • 149 Downloads

Abstract

Context

Invasive Burmese pythons are altering the ecology of southern Florida and their distribution is expanding northward. Understanding their habitat use is an important step in understanding the pathways of the invasion.

Objectives

This study identifies key landscape variables in predicting relative habitat suitability for pythons at the present stage of invasion through presence-only ecological niche modeling using geographical sampling bias correction.

Methods

We used 2014 presence-only observations from the EDDMapS database and three landscape variables to model habitat suitability: fine-scale land cover, home range-level land cover, and distance to open freshwater or wetland. Ten geographical sampling bias correction scenarios based on road presence and sampling effort were evaluated to improve the efficacy of modeling.

Results

The best performing models treated road presence as a binary factor rather than a continuous decrease in sampling effort with distance from roads. Home range-level cover contributed the most to the final prediction, followed by proximity to water and fine-scale land cover. Estuarine habitat and freshwater wetlands were the most important variables to contribute to python habitat suitability at both the home range-level and fine-scale. Suitability was highest within 30 m of open freshwater and wetlands.

Conclusions

This study provides quantifiable, predictive relationships between habitat types and python presence at the current stage of invasion. This knowledge can elucidate future targeted studies of python habitat use and behavior and help inform management efforts. Furthermore, it illustrates how estimates of relative habitat suitability derived from MaxEnt can be improved by both multi-scale perspectives on habitat and consideration of a variety of bias correction scenarios for selecting background points.

Keywords

Burmese pythons Ecological niche modeling Invasive species Landscape-level habitat MaxEnt Python molurus bivittatus Southern Florida 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank R. Snow, C. Bargeron, P. Andreadis, I. Bartoszek, and C. Ervin for providing data and insight into the development of the model. We thank J.D. Willson and S. Fei for comments that greatly improved this manuscript. This work was partially funded by a Purdue University Knox Fellowship grant to H. Mutascio and the National Science Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowship in Biology Program Grant No. 1309144. We also thank The McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Research Program for their financial support.

Supplementary material

10980_2017_597_MOESM1_ESM.docx (450 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 450 kb)

References

  1. Andreadis PT (2011) Python molrus bivittatus (Burmese python). Reproducing population. Herpetol Rev 42(2):302–303Google Scholar
  2. Baldwin RA (2009) Use of maximum entropy modeling in wildlife research. Entropy 11(4):854–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barve N (2008) Tool for partial-ROC (Version 1) (Software). http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/handle/1808/10059
  4. Beyer HL (2012) Geospatial Modelling Environment (Version 0.7.3.0) (Software). http://www.spatialecology.com/gme
  5. Bhupathy S, Vuayan VS (1989) Status, distribution and general ecology of the Indian python, Python molurus molurus linn. in Keoladeo National Park, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 86(3):381–387Google Scholar
  6. Bowman JJ, Jaeger AG, Fahrig L (2002) Dispersal distance of mammals is proportional to home range size. Ecology 83(7):2049–2055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clements GR, Rayan DM, Aziz SA, Kawanishi K, Traeholt C, Magintan D, Yazi MFA, Tingley R (2012) Predicting the distribution of the Asian tapir in Peninsular Malaysia using maximum entropy modeling. Integr Zool 7(4):400–406CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Conservancy of Southwest Florida (2015) Burmese pythons. https://www.conservancy.org/our-work/science/burmese-pythons. Accessed Feb 2016
  9. Domènech R, Vilà M, Pino J, Gesti J (2005) Historical land-use legacy and Cortaderia selloana invasion in the Mediterranean region. Glob Chang Biol 11(7):1054–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dorcas ME, Willson JD (2013) Hidden giants: problems associated with studying secretive invasive pythons. In: Lutterschmidt WI (ed) Reptiles in research: investigations of ecology, physiology, and behavior from desert to sea. Nova Biomedical, New York, pp 367–385Google Scholar
  11. Dorcas ME, Willson JD, Reed RN, Snow RW, Rochford MR, Miller MA, Meshaka WE Jr, Andreadis PT, Mazzotti FJ, Romagosa CM, Hart KM (2012) Severe mammal declines coincide with proliferation of invasive Burmese pythons in Everglades National Park. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(7):2418–2422CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Dove CJ, Snow RW, Rochford MR, Mazzotti FJ (2011) Birds consumed by the invasive Burmese python (Python molurus bivittatus) in Everglades National Park, Florida,USA. Wilson J Ornithol 123(1):126–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. EDDMapS (2015) Early detection & distribution mapping system. The University of Georgia—Center for invasive species and ecosystem health. http://www.eddmaps.org/. Accessed Feb 2015
  14. Elith J, Kearney M, Phillips S (2010) The art of modeling range-shifting species. Methods Ecol Evol 1(4):330–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elith J, Phillips S, Hastie T, Dudík M, Chee YE, Yates C (2011) A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers Distrib 17(1):43–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Engeman R, Jacobson E, Avery ML, Meshaka WE Jr (2011) The aggressive invasion of exotic reptiles in Florida with a focus on prominent species: a review. Curr Zool 57(5):599–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ernst CH, Zug GR (1996) Snakes in question. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Escobar LE, Peterson AT, Favi M, Yung V, Pons DJ, Medina-Vogel G (2013) Ecology and geography of transmission of two bat-borne rabies lineages in Chile. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 7(12):e2577CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Ficetola GF, Maiorano L, Falcucci A, Dendoncker N, Boitani L, Padoa-Schioppa E, Miaud C, Thuiller W (2010) Knowing the past to predict the future: land-use change and the distribution of invasive bullfrogs. Glob Chang Biol 16(2):528–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fitzpatrick MC, Gotelli NJ, Allison AM (2013) MaxEnt versus MaxLike: empirical comparisons with ant species distributions. Ecosphere 4(5):1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fourcade Y, Engler JO, Rödder D, Secondi J (2014) Mapping species distributions with MAXENT using a geographically biased sample of presence data: a performance assessment of methods for correcting sampling bias. PLoS ONE 9(5):e97122CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Greene DU, Potts JM, Duquesnel JG, Snow RW (2007) Geographic distribution: Python molurus bivittatus (Burmese python). Herpetol Rev 38:355Google Scholar
  23. Hansen AJ, Urban DL (1992) Avian response to landscape pattern: the role of species’ life histories. Landscape Ecol 7(3):163–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hart KM, Cherkiss MS, Smith BJ, Mazzotti FJ, Fujisaki I, Snow RW, Dorcas ME (2015) Home range, habitat use, and movement patterns of non-native Burmese pythons in Everglades National Park, Florida, USA. Anim Biotelem 3(8):1–13Google Scholar
  25. Hart KM, Schoefield PJ, Gregoire DR (2012) Experimentally derived salinity tolerance of hatchling Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) from the Everglades, Florida (USA). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 413:56–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Harvey RG, Brien ML, Cherkiss MS, Dorcas M, Rochford M, Snow RW, Mazzotti FJ (2009) Burmese pythons in south Florida: scientific support for invasive species management. Wildlife Ecology and Conservation Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USAGoogle Scholar
  27. Hill MP, Hoffmann AA, Macfadyen S, Umina PA, Elith J (2012) Understanding niche shifts: using current and historical data to model the invasive redlegged earth mite, Halotydeus destructor. Divers Distrib 18(2):191–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kapfer JM, Pekar CW, Reineke DM, Coggins JR, Hay R (2010) Modeling the relationship between habitat preferences and home-range size: a case study on a large mobile colubrid snake from North America. J Zool 282(1):13–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kramer-Schadt S, Niedballa J, Pilgrim JD, Schröder B, Lindenborn J, Reinfelder V, Stillfried M, Heckmann I, Scharf AK, Augeri DM, Cheyne SM, Hearn AJ, Ross J, Macdonald DW, Mathai J, Eaton J, Marshall AJ, Semiadi G, Rustam R, Bernard H, Alfred R, Samegima H, Duckworth JW, Breitenmoser-Wuersten C, Belant JL, Hofer H, Wilting A (2013) The importance of correcting for sampling bias in MaxEnt species distribution models. Divers Distrib 19(11):1366–1379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Krausman PR (1999) Some basic principles of habitat use. Grazing Behavior of Livestock and Wildlife, Idaho Forest, Wildlife & Range Exp. Sta. Bull.#70, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, pp 85–90Google Scholar
  31. Lobo JM, Jiménez-Valverde A, Real R (2008) AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 17(2):145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mayor SJ, Schneider DC, Schaefer JA, Mahoney SP (2009) Habitat selection at multiple scales. Ecoscience 16(2):238–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McCleery RA, Sovie A, Reed RN, Cunningham MW, Hunter ME, Hart KM (2015) Marsh rabbit mortalities tie pythons to the precipitous decline of mammals in the everglades. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 282(1805):20150120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Merow C, Smith MJ, Silander JA Jr (2013) A practical guide to MaxEnt for modeling species’ distributions: what it does, and why inputs and settings matter. Ecography 36(10):1058–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meshaka WE Jr, Loftus WF, Steiner T (2000) The herpetofauna of Everglades National Park. Fla Sci 63(2):84–103Google Scholar
  36. Metzger CJ (2013) Python molurus bivittatus (Burmese python): habitat use. Herpetol Rev 44:333–334Google Scholar
  37. Minton SA (1966) A contribution to the herpetology of West Pakistan. Bull Am Mus Nat Hist 134:29–184Google Scholar
  38. Mladenoff DJ, Clayton MK, Pratt SD, Sickley TA, Wydeven AP (2009) Change in occupied wolf habitat in the northern Great Lakes region. In: Wydeven AP, van Deelen TR, Heske AJ (eds) Recovery of Gray wolves in the Great Lakes region of the United States. Springer, New York, pp 119–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mladenoff DJ, Sickley TA, Haight RG, Wydeven AP (1995) A regional landscape analysis and prediction of favorable gray wolf habitat in the northern Great Lakes region. Conserv Biol 9(2):279–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mladenoff DJ, Sickley TA, Wydeven AP (1999) Predicting gray wolf landscape recolonization: logistic regression models vs. new field data. Ecol Appl 9(1):37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mooney HA, Cleland EE (2001) The evolutionary impact of invasive species. PNAS 98(10):5446–5451CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Morris DW (2003) Toward an ecological synthesis: a case for habitat selection. Oecologia 136(1):1–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Muscarella R, Galante PJ, Soley-Guardia M, Boria RA, Kass JM, Uriarte M, Anderson RP (2014) ENMeval: an R package for conducting spatially independent evaluations and estimating optimal model complexity for Maxent ecological niche models. Methods Ecol Evol 5:1198–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mutascio HE, Pittman SE, Zollner PA (2017) Investigating movement behavior of invasive Burmese pythons on a shy-bold continuum using individual-based modeling. Perspect Ecol Conserv 15(1):25–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pearson RG, Raxworthy CJ, Nakamura M, Peterson AT (2007) Predicting species distributions fromsmall numbers of occurrence records: a test case using cryptic geckos in Madagascar. J Biogeogr 34:102–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Peterson AT (2003) Predicting the geography of species’ invasions via ecological niche modeling. Q Rev Biol 78(4):419–433CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Peterson AT (2006) Uses and requirements of ecological niche models and related distribution models. Biodivers Inform 3:59–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Peterson AT (2011) Ecological niches and geographic distributions (MPB-49). Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  49. Peterson AT, Papeş M, Soberón J (2008) Rethinking receiver operating characteristic analysis applications in ecological niche modeling. Ecol Model 213(1):63–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Phillips SJ (2008) Transferability, sample selection bias and background data in presence-only modelling: a response to Peterson et al. Ecography 31(2):272–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE (2006a) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model 190(3):231–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Phillips BL, Brown GP, Webb JK, Shine R (2006b) Invasion and the evolution of speed in toads. Nature 439(7078):803CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Phillips SJ, Dudík M (2008) Modeling of species distributions with Maxent: new extensions and a comprehensive evaluation. Ecography 31(2):161–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Phillips SJ, Dudík M, Elith J, Graham CH, Lehmann A, Leathwick J, Ferrier S (2009) Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecol Appl 19(1):181–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Phillips SJ, Dudík M, Schapire RE (2004) A maximum entropy approach to species distribution modeling. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Conference on Machine Learning, pp 655–662Google Scholar
  56. Pittman SE, Hart KM, Cherkiss MS, Snow RW, Fujisaki I, Smith BJ, Mazzotti FJ, Dorcas ME (2014) Homing of invasive Burmese pythons in South Florida: evidence for map and compass senses in snakes. Biol Lett 10(3):20140040CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Pyron RA, Burbrink FT, Guiher TJ (2008) Claims of potential expansion throughout the U.S. by invasive python species are contradicted by ecological niche models. PLoS ONE 3(8):e2931CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. R Development Core Team (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  59. Reed RN (2005) An ecological risk assessment of nonnative boas and pythons as potentially invasive species in the United States. Risk Anal 25(3):753–766CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Reed RN, Hart KM, Rodda GH, Mazzotti FJ, Snow RW, Cherkiss M, Rozar R, Goetz S (2011) A field test of attractant traps for invasive Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) in southern Florida. Wildl Res 38(2):114–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Reed RN, Krysko KL, Snow RW, Rodda GH (2010) Is the Northern African python (Python sebae) established in southern Florida? IRCF Reptile Amphib 17(1):52–54Google Scholar
  62. Reed RN, Willson JD, Rodda GH, Dorcas ME (2012) Ecological correlates of invasion impact for Burmese pythons in Florida. Integr Zool 7(3):254–270CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Rodda GH, Jarnevich CS, Reed RN (2008) What parts of the US mainland are climatically suitable for invasive alien pythons spreading from Everglades National Park? Biol Invasions 11(2):241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rodda GH, Jarnevich CS, Reed RN (2011) Challenges in identifying sites climatically matched to the native ranges of animal invaders. PLoS ONE 6(2):e14670CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. Schoener TW (1968) Anolis lizards of Bimini: resource partitioning in a complex fauna. Ecology 49(4):704–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Shepard DB, Kuhns AR, Dreslik MJ, Phillips CA (2008) Roads as barriers to animal movement in fragmented landscapes. Anim Conserv 11(4):288–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sillero N (2011) What does ecological modelling model? A proposed classification of ecological niche models based on their underlying methods. Ecol Model 222(8):1343–1346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Snow RW, Brien ML, Cherkiss MS, Wilkins L, Mazzotti FJ (2007a) Dietary habits of the Burmese python, Python molurus bivittatus, in Everglades National Park, Florida. Herpetol Bull 101:5–7Google Scholar
  69. Snow RW, Krysko KL, Enge KM, Oberhofer L, Warren-Bradley A, Wilkins L (2007b) Introduced populations of Boa constrictor (Boidae) and Python molurus bivittatus (Pythonidae) in southern Florida. In: Henderson RW, Powell R (eds) Biology of the Boas and Pythons. Eagle Mountain Publishing, Eagle Mountain, pp 416–438Google Scholar
  70. Stolar J, Nielson SE (2014) Accounting for spatially biased sampling effort in presence-only species distribution modelling. Divers Distrib 21(5):595–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Syfert MM, Smith MJ, Coomes DA (2013) The effects of sampling bias and model complexity on the predictive performance of MaxEnt species distribution models. PLoS ONE 8(2):e55158CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  72. Thompson GD, Robertson MP, Webber BL, Richardson DM, Le Roux JJ, Wilson JRU (2011) Predicting the subspecific identity of invasive species using distribution models: Acacia saligna as an example. Divers Distrib 17(5):1001–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Urban MC, Phillips BL, Skelly DK, Shine R (2007) The cane toad’s (Chaunus [Bufo] marinus) increasing ability to invade Australia is revealed by a dynamically updated range model. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 274(1616):1413–1419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Václavík T, Meentemeyer RK (2009) Invasive species distribution modeling (iSDM): are absence data and dispersal constraints needed to predict actual distributions? Ecol Model 220(23):3248–3258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Václavík T, Meentemeyer RK (2012) Equilibrium or not? Modelling potential distribution of invasive species in different stages of invasion. Divers Distrib 18(1):73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Van der Vaart AW (1998) Asymptotic statistics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wall F (1921) Ophidia Taprobanica or the Snakes of Ceylon. H. R. Cottle, Government Print, ColomboCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Walters TM, Mazzotti FJ, Fitz HC (2016) Habitat selection by the invasive species Burmese python in southern Florida. J Herpetol 50(1):50–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Warren DL, Glor RE, Turelli M (2010) ENMTools: a toolbox for comparative studies of environmental niche models. Ecography 33(3):607–611Google Scholar
  80. Warren DL, Seifert SN (2011) Ecological niche modelling in MaxEnt: the importance of model complexity and the performance of model criteria. Ecol Appl 21(2):335–342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Whitaker R (1978) Common Indian snakes: a field guide. Macmillan India, DelhiGoogle Scholar
  82. Wiens JJ, Graham CH (2005) Niche conservatism: integrating evolution, ecology, and conservation biology. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 36:519–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Willson JD, Dorcas ME, Snow RW (2011) Identifying plausible scenarios for the establishment of invasive Burmese pythons (Python molurus) in southern Florida. Biol Invasions 13(7):1493–1504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wilting A, Cord A, Hearn AJ, Hesse D, Mohamed A, Traeholdt C, Cheyne SM, Sunarto S, Jayasilan M-A, Ross J, Shapiro AC, Sebastian A, Dech S, Breitenmoser C, Sanderson J, Duckworth JW, Hofer H (2010) Modelling the species distribution of flat-headed cats (Prionailurus planiceps), an endangered South-East Asian small felid. PLoS ONE 5(3):e9612CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  85. Yackulic CB, Chandler R, Zipkin EF, Royle JA, Nichols JD, Campbell Grant EH, Veran S (2012) Presence-only modelling using MAXENT: when can we trust the inferences? Methods Ecol Evol 4(3):236–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Yost AC, Petersen SL, Gregg M, Miller R (2008) Predictive modeling and mapping sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) nesting habitat using Maximum Entropy and a long-term dataset from Southern Oregon. Ecol Inform 3(6):375–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Holly E. Mutascio
    • 1
  • Shannon E. Pittman
    • 2
  • Patrick A. Zollner
    • 1
  • Laura E. D’Acunto
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Forestry and Natural ResourcesPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyDavidson CollegeDavidsonUSA

Personalised recommendations