A comparative evaluation of presence‐only methods for modelling species distribution

ABSTRACT In spite of increasing application of presence‐only models in ecology and conservation and the growing number of such models, little is known about the relative performance of different modelling methods, and some of the leading models (e.g. GARP and ENFA) have never been compared with one another. Here we compare the performance of six presence‐only models that have been selected to represent an increasing level of model complexity BIOCLIM, HABITAT, Mahalanobis distance (MD), DOMAIN, ENFA, and GARP using data on the distribution of 42 species of land snails, nesting birds, and insectivorous bats in Israel. The models were calibrated using data from museum collections and observation databases, and their predictions were evaluated using Cohen's Kappa based on field data collected in a standardized sampling design covering most parts of Israel. Predictive accuracy varied between modelling methods with GARP and MD showing the highest accuracy, BIOCLIM and ENFA showing the lowest accuracy, and HABITAT and DOMAIN showing intermediate accuracy levels. Yet, differences between the various models were relatively small except for GARP and MD that were significantly more accurate than BIOCLIM and ENFA. In spite of large differences among species in prevalence and niche width, neither prevalence nor niche width interacted with the modelling method in determining predictive accuracy. However, species with relatively narrow niches were modelled more accurately than species with wider niches. Differences among species in predictive accuracy were highly consistent over all modelling methods, indicating the need for a better understanding of the ecological and geographical factors that influence the performance of species distribution models.