Can coarse‐grain patterns in insect atlas data predict local occupancy?

Sampling and modelling rare species: Conceptual guidelines for the neglected majority

Biodiversity conservation faces a methodological conundrum: Biodiversity measurement often relies on species, most of which are rare at various scales, especially prone to extinction under global change, but also the most challenging to sample and model. Predicting the distribution change of rare species using conventional species distribution models is challenging because rare species are hardly captured by most survey systems. When enough data are available, predictions are usually spatially biased towards locations where the species is most likely to occur, violating the assumptions of many modelling frameworks. Workflows to predict and eventually map rare species distributions imply important trade-offs between data quantity, quality, representativeness and model complexity that need to be considered prior to survey and analysis. Our opinion is that study designs need to carefully integrate the different steps, from species sampling to modelling, in accordance with the different types of rarity and available data in order to improve our capacity for sound assessment and prediction of rare species distribution. In this article, we summarize and comment on how different categories of species rarity lead to different types of occurrence and distribution data depending on choices made during the survey process, namely the spatial distribution of samples (where to sample) and the sampling protocol in each selected location (how to sample). We then clarify which species distribution models are suitable depending on the different types of distribution data (how to model). Among others, for most rarity forms, we highlight the insights from systematic species-targeted sampling coupled with hierarchical models that allow correcting for overdispersion and spatial and sampling sources of bias. Our article provides scientists and practitioners with a much-needed guide through the ever-increasing diversity of methodological developments to improve the prediction of rare species distribution depending on rarity type and available data.

Data Integration for Large-Scale Models of Species Distributions

With the expansion in the quantity and types of biodiversity data being collected, there is a need to find ways to combine these different sources to provide cohesive summaries of species' potential and realized distributions in space and time. Recently, model-based data integration has emerged as a means to achieve this by combining datasets in ways that retain the strengths of each. We describe a flexible approach to data integration using point process models, which provide a convenient way to translate across ecological currencies. We highlight recent examples of large-scale ecological models based on data integration and outline the conceptual and technical challenges and opportunities that arise.

Downscaling patterns of complementarity to a finer resolution and its implications for conservation prioritization

Given species inventories of all sites in a planning area, integer programming or heuristic algorithms can prioritize sites in terms of the site's complementary value, that is, the ability of the site to complement (add unrepresented species to) other sites prioritized for conservation. The utility of these procedures is limited because distributions of species are typically available only as coarse atlases or range maps, whereas conservation planners need to prioritize relatively small sites. If such coarse‐resolution information can be used to identify small sites that efficiently represent species (i.e., downscaled), then such data can be useful for conservation planning. We develop and test a new type of surrogate for biodiversity, which we call downscaled complementarity. In this approach, complementarity values from large cells are downscaled to small cells, using statistical methods or simple map overlays. We illustrate our approach for birds in Spain by building models at coarse scale (50 × 50 km atlas of European birds, and global range maps of birds interpreted at the same 50 × 50 km grid size), using this model to predict complementary value for 10 × 10 km cells in Spain, and testing how well‐prioritized cells represented bird distributions in an independent bird atlas of those 10 × 10 km cells. Downscaled complementarity was about 63–77% as effective as having full knowledge of the 10‐km atlas data in its ability to improve on random selection of sites. Downscaled complementarity has relatively low data acquisition cost and meets representation goals well compared with other surrogates currently in use. Our study justifies additional tests to determine whether downscaled complementarity is an effective surrogate for other regions and taxa, and at spatial resolution finer than 10 × 10 km cells. Until such tests have been completed, we caution against assuming that any surrogate can reliably prioritize sites for species representation.