Skip to main content
Log in

Dealing with Uncertainty in Spatially Explicit Population Models

  • Published:
Biodiversity & Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It has been argued that spatially explicit population models (SEPMs) cannot provide reliable guidance for conservation biology because of the difficulty of obtaining direct estimates for their demographic and dispersal parameters and because of error propagation. We argue that appropriate model calibration procedures can access additional sources of information, compensating the lack of direct parameter estimates. Our objective is to show how model calibration using population-level data can facilitate the construction of SEPMs that produce reliable predictions for conservation even when direct parameter estimates are inadequate. We constructed a spatially explicit and individual-based population model for the dynamics of brown bears (Ursus arctos) after a reintroduction program in Austria. To calibrate the model we developed a procedure that compared the simulated population dynamics with distinct features of the known population dynamics (=patterns). This procedure detected model parameterizations that did not reproduce the known dynamics. Global sensitivity analysis of the uncalibrated model revealed high uncertainty in most model predictions due to large parameter uncertainties (coefficients of variation CV ≈ 0.8). However, the calibrated model yielded predictions with considerably reduced uncertainty (CV ≈ 0.2). A pattern or a combination of various patterns that embed information on the entire model dynamics can reduce the uncertainty in model predictions, and the application of different patterns with high information content yields the same model predictions. In contrast, a pattern that does not embed information on the entire population dynamics (e.g., bear observations taken from sub-areas of the study area) does not reduce uncertainty in model predictions. Because population-level data for defining (multiple) patterns are often available, our approach could be applied widely.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beissinger S.R. and Westphal M.I. 1998. On the use of demographic models of population viability in endangered species management. Journal of Wildlife Management 62: 821-841.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgman M. and Possingham H.P. 2000. Population viability analysis for conservation: the good, the bad and the undescribed. In: Young A.G. and Clarke G.M. (eds), Genetics, Demography and Viability of Fragmented Populations. Cambridge University Press, London, pp. 97-112.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeAngelis D.L. and Mooij W.M. 2003. In praise of mechanistically-rich models. In: Canham C., Cole J.J. and Lauenroth W. (eds), Models in Ecosystem Science. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doak D.F. and Mills L.S. 1994. A useful role for theory in conservation. Ecology 75: 615-626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning J.B., Danielson B.J. and Pulliam H.R. 1992. Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos 65: 169-175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning J.B., Stewart D.J., Danielson B.J., Noon B.R., Root T.L., Lamberson R.H. et al. 1995. Spatially explicit population models: current forms and future uses. Ecological Applications 5: 3-11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L. and Merriam G. 1994. Conservation of fragmented populations. Conservation Biology 8: 50-59.

  • Gaona P., Ferreras P. and Delibes M. 1998. Dynamics and viability of a metapopulation of the endangered Iberian Lynx (Lynx pardinus). Ecological Monographs 68: 349-370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm V. 1994. Mathematical models and understanding in ecology. Ecological Modelling 75/76: 641-651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm V., Frank K., Jeltsch F., Brandl R., Uchmanski J. and Wissel C. 1996. Pattern-oriented modelling in population ecology. The Science of the Total Environment 183: 151-166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I. 1994. A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. Journal of Animal Ecology 63: 151-162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartway C., Ruckelshaus M. and Kareiva P. 1998. The challenge of applying spatially explicit models to a world of sparse and messy data. In: Bascompte J. and Solé R.V. (eds), Modeling Spatiotemporal Dynamics in Ecology. Springer-Verlag and Landes Bioscience, Berlin, Germany, pp. 215-223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins S.I., Richardson D.M. and Cowling R.M. 2000. Using a dynamic landscape model for planning the management of alien plant invasions. Ecological Applications 10: 1833-1848.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilborn R. and Mangel M. 1997. The Ecological Detective: Confronting Models with Data. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeltsch F., Moloney K.A. and Milton S.J. 1999. Detecting process from snap-shot pattern: lessons from tree spacing in the southern Kalahari. Oikos 85: 451-467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaczensky P. and Knauer F. 2000. Habitat use of bears in a multi-use landscape. In: Kaczensky P. (ed), Co-existence of Brown Bear and Man in the Cultural Landscape of Slovenia. Report of the Institute of Wildlife Biology and Game Management at the Agricultural University of Vienna, Austria.

  • Kaczensky P., Knauer F., Huber T., Jonozovic M. and Adamic M. 1996. The Ljubljana-Postojna highway-a deadly barrier for brown bears in Slovenia? Journal of Wildlife Research 1: 263-269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaczensky P., Knauer F., Jonozovic M., Walzer C. and Huber T. 2000. Experiences with trapping, immobilization and radiotagging of brown bears in Slovenia. In: Kaczensky P. (ed), Co-existence of Brown Bear and Man in the Cultural Landscape of Slovenia. Report of the Institute of Wildlife Biology and Game Management at the Agricultural University of Vienna, Austria

  • Kareiva P., Skelly D. and Ruckelshaus M. 1997. Reevaluating the use of models to predict the consequences of habitat loss and fragmentation. In: Pickett S.T.A., Ostfeld R.S., Shachak H. and Likens G.E. (eds), The Ecological Basis for Conservation. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 156-166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall B.E., Briggs C.J., Murdoch W.W., Turchin P., Ellner S.P., McCauley E. et al. 1999. Why do populations cycle? A synthesis of statistical and mechanistic modeling approaches. Ecology 80: 1789-1805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin S.A. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73: 1943-1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lima S.L. and Zollner P.A. 1996. Towards a behavioral ecology of ecological landscapes. Tree 11: 131-135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer D.B., Lacy R.C. and Pope M.L. 2000. Testing a simulation model for population viability analysis. Ecological Applications 10: 580-597.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy M.A., Burgman M.A. and Ferson S. 1995. Sensitivity analysis for models of population viability. Biological Conservation 73: 93-100.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy M.A., Lindenmayer D.B. and Possingham H.P. 2000. Testing spatial PVA models of Australian treecreepers (Aves: Climacteridae) in fragmented forest. Ecological Applications 10: 1722-1731.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meir E. and Kareiva P. 1997. Contributions of spatially explicit landscape models to conservation biology. In: Fiedler P.L. and Kareiva P. (eds), Conservation Biology for the Coming Decade. 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 497-507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mladenoff D.J., Sickley T.A. and Wydeven A.P. 1999. Predicting gray wolf landscape recolonization: logistic regression models vs. new field data. Ecological Applications 9: 37-44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moloney K.A. 1993. Determining process through pattern: reality or fantasy? In: Levin S.A., Powell T.M. and Steele J.H. (eds), Lecture Notes in Biomathematics Vol. 96. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 61-69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mooij W.M. and DeAngelis D.L. 1999. Error propagation in spatially explicit population models: a reassessment. Conservation Biology 13: 930-933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulliam H.R. and Dunning J.B. 1995. Spatially explicit population models. Ecological Applications 5: 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Railsback S.F. and Harvey B.C. 2002. Analysis of habitat-selection rules using an individual-based model. Ecology 83: 1817-1830.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauer G.B. and Gutleb 1997. Der Braunbär in Österreich. Monographie. Federal Environment Agency-Austria, Vienna, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauer G.B., Aubrecht P., Gutleb B., Kaczensky P., Knauer F., Plutzar C. et al. 2001. Der Braunbär in Österreich II. Vol. M-110. Federal Environment Agency, Vienna, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruckelshaus M., Hartway C. and Kareiva P. 1997. Assessing the data requirement of spatially explicit dispersal models. Conservation Biology 11: 1298-1306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruckelshaus M., Hartway C. and Kareiva P. 1999. Dispersal and landscape errors in spatially explicit population models: a reply. Conservation Biology 13: 1223-1224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rushton S.P., Barreto G.W., Cormack R.M., Macdonald D.W. and Fuller R. 2000. Modelling the effects of mink and habitat fragmentation on the water vole. Journal of Applied Ecology 37: 475-490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schadt S., Revilla E., Wiegand T., Knauer F., Kaczensky P., Breitenmoser U. et al. 2002. Assessing the suitability of central European landscapes for the reintroduction of Eurasian lynx. Journal of Applied Ecology 39: 189-203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sæther B.-E., Engen S., Swenson J.E., Bakke Ø. and Sandegren F. 1998. Viability of Scandinavian brown bear Ursus arctos populations: the effects of uncertain parameter estimates. Oikos 83: 403-416.

    Google Scholar 

  • South A. 1999. Dispersal in spatially explicit population models. Conservation Biology 13: 1039-1046.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swenson J.E., Sandegren F. and Söderberg A. 1998. Geographic expansion of an increasing brown bear population: evidence for presaturation dispersal. Journal of Animal Ecology 67: 819-826.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swenson J.E., Gerstl N., Dahle B. and Zedrosser A. 2000. Action plan for the conservation of the brown bear (Ursus arctos) in Europe. Council of Europe, Report T-PVS (2000) 24.

  • Turchin P. 2003. Complex Population Dynamics: A Theoretical/Empirical Synthesis. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wennergren U., Ruckelshaus M. and Kareiva P. 1995. The promise and limitations of spatial models in conservation biology. Oikos 74: 349-356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiegand T., Naves J., Stephan T. and Fernandez A. 1998. Assessing the risk of extinction for the brown bear (Ursus arctos) in the Cordillera Cantabrica, Spain. Ecological Monographs 68: 539-571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiegand T., Moloney K.A., Naves J. and Knauer F. 1999. Finding the missing link between landscape structure and population dynamics: a spatially explicit perspective. The American Naturalist 154: 605-627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiegand T., Jeltsch F., Hanski I. and Grimm V. 2003. Using pattern-oriented modeling for revealing hidden information: a key for reconciling ecological theory and application. Oikos 100: 209-222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiegand T., Knauer F., Kaczensky P. and Naves J. 2004. Expansion of brown bears (Ursus arctos) into the eastern Alps: a spatially explicit population model. Biodiversity and Conservation 13: 79-114 (this issue).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiens J.A., Stenseth N.C., van Horne B. and Ims R.A. 1993. Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology. Oikos 66: 369-380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood S.N. 2001. Partially specified ecological models. Ecological Monographs 71: 1-25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zedrosser A., Gerstl N. and Rauer G. 1999. Brown Bears in Austria. Vol. M-117. Federal Environment Agency, Vienna, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thorsten Wiegand.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wiegand, T., Revilla, E. & Knauer, F. Dealing with Uncertainty in Spatially Explicit Population Models. Biodiversity and Conservation 13, 53–78 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOC.0000004313.86836.ab

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOC.0000004313.86836.ab

Navigation