Abstract

AbstractHypervolume approaches are used to quantify functional diversity and quantify environmental niches for species distribution modelling. Recently, Qiao et al. () criticized our geometrical kernel density estimation (KDE) method for measuring hypervolumes. They used a simulation analysis to argue that the method yields high error rates and makes biased estimates of fundamental niches. Here, we show that (a) KDE output depends in useful ways on dataset size and bias, (b) other species distribution modelling methods make equally stringent but different assumptions about dataset bias, (c) simulation results presented by Qiao et al. () were incorrect, with revised analyses showing performance comparable to other methods, and (d) hypervolume methods are more general than KDE and have other benefits for niche modelling. As a result, our KDE method remains a promising tool for species distribution modelling.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.