Models of Marine Fish Biodiversity: Assessing Predictors from Three Habitat Classification Schemes.

Katherine L Yates, Camille Mellin, M Julian Caley, Ben T Radford, Jessica J Meeuwig
Author Information
  1. Katherine L Yates: Australian Institute of Marine Science, PMB 3, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
  2. Camille Mellin: Australian Institute of Marine Science, PMB 3, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
  3. M Julian Caley: Australian Institute of Marine Science, PMB 3, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
  4. Ben T Radford: Australian Institute of Marine Science, UWA Oceans Institute, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
  5. Jessica J Meeuwig: Centre for Marine Futures, Oceans Institute and School of Animal Biology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.

Abstract

Prioritising biodiversity conservation requires knowledge of where biodiversity occurs. Such knowledge, however, is often lacking. New technologies for collecting biological and physical data coupled with advances in modelling techniques could help address these gaps and facilitate improved management outcomes. Here we examined the utility of environmental data, obtained using different methods, for developing models of both uni- and multivariate biodiversity metrics. We tested which biodiversity metrics could be predicted best and evaluated the performance of predictor variables generated from three types of habitat data: acoustic multibeam sonar imagery, predicted habitat classification, and direct observer habitat classification. We used boosted regression trees (BRT) to model metrics of fish species richness, abundance and biomass, and multivariate regression trees (MRT) to model biomass and abundance of fish functional groups. We compared model performance using different sets of predictors and estimated the relative influence of individual predictors. Models of total species richness and total abundance performed best; those developed for endemic species performed worst. Abundance models performed substantially better than corresponding biomass models. In general, BRT and MRTs developed using predicted habitat classifications performed less well than those using multibeam data. The most influential individual predictor was the abiotic categorical variable from direct observer habitat classification and models that incorporated predictors from direct observer habitat classification consistently outperformed those that did not. Our results show that while remotely sensed data can offer considerable utility for predictive modelling, the addition of direct observer habitat classification data can substantially improve model performance. Thus it appears that there are aspects of marine habitats that are important for modelling metrics of fish biodiversity that are not fully captured by remotely sensed data. As such, the use of remotely sensed data to model biodiversity represents a compromise between model performance and data availability.

References

  1. Science. 2008 Feb 15;319(5865):948-52 [PMID: 18276889]
  2. Science. 2006 Nov 3;314(5800):787-90 [PMID: 17082450]
  3. J Environ Manage. 2015 Apr 1;152:201-9 [PMID: 25684567]
  4. PLoS One. 2015 Oct 28;10(10):e0141039 [PMID: 26509918]
  5. Nature. 2012 Aug 30;488(7413):615-20 [PMID: 22895186]
  6. J Anim Ecol. 2008 Jul;77(4):802-13 [PMID: 18397250]
  7. PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e26556 [PMID: 22073172]
  8. Ecology. 2007 Jan;88(1):243-51 [PMID: 17489472]
  9. Mar Pollut Bull. 2009 Jan;58(1):11-9 [PMID: 19058817]
  10. Nature. 2003 May 15;423(6937):280-3 [PMID: 12748640]
  11. Ecol Appl. 2012 Sep;22(6):1762-71 [PMID: 23092013]
  12. PLoS One. 2013 Jul 16;8(7):e68424 [PMID: 23874623]
  13. PLoS One. 2011;6(6):e20141 [PMID: 21695119]
  14. Nature. 2000 May 11;405(6783):243-53 [PMID: 10821285]
  15. Ecol Appl. 2012 Apr;22(3):792-803 [PMID: 22645811]
  16. Mar Pollut Bull. 2007 Mar;54(3):253-65 [PMID: 17266994]
  17. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2005 Jan 29;360(1453):5-12 [PMID: 15713585]

MeSH Term

Animals
Aquatic Organisms
Biodiversity
Fishes
Geography
Islands
Models, Theoretical
Regression Analysis
Western Australia

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0datahabitatbiodiversitymodelclassificationusingmodelsmetricsperformancedirectobserverperformedmodellingpredictedfishspeciesabundancebiomasspredictorsremotelysensedknowledgeutilitydifferentmultivariatebestpredictormultibeamregressiontreesBRTrichnessindividualModelstotaldevelopedsubstantiallycanPrioritisingconservationrequiresoccurshoweveroftenlackingNewtechnologiescollectingbiologicalphysicalcoupledadvancestechniqueshelpaddressgapsfacilitateimprovedmanagementoutcomesexaminedenvironmentalobtainedmethodsdevelopinguni-testedevaluatedvariablesgeneratedthreetypesdata:acousticsonarimageryusedboostedMRTfunctionalgroupscomparedsetsestimatedrelativeinfluenceendemicworstAbundancebettercorrespondinggeneralMRTsclassificationslesswellinfluentialabioticcategoricalvariableincorporatedconsistentlyoutperformedresultsshowofferconsiderablepredictiveadditionimproveThusappearsaspectsmarinehabitatsimportantfullycaptureduserepresentscompromiseavailabilityMarineFishBiodiversity:AssessingPredictorsThreeHabitatClassificationSchemes

Similar Articles

Cited By (2)