@misc{DormannSchymanskiCabraletal.2012,
  author    = {Dormann, Carsten F. and Schymanski, Stanislaus J. and Cabral, Juliano Sarmento and Chuine, Isabelle and Graham, Catherine and Hartig, Florian and Kearney, Michael and Morin, Xavier and R{\"o}mermann, Christine and Schr{\"o}der-Esselbach, Boris and Singer, Alexander},
  title     = {Correlation and process in species distribution models: bridging a dichotomy},
  series = {Journal of biogeography},
  volume    = {39},
  journal   = {Journal of biogeography},
  number    = {12},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {0305-0270},
  doi       = {10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02659.x},
  pages     = {2119 -- 2131},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Within the field of species distribution modelling an apparent dichotomy exists between process-based and correlative approaches, where the processes are explicit in the former and implicit in the latter. However, these intuitive distinctions can become blurred when comparing species distribution modelling approaches in more detail. In this review article, we contrast the extremes of the correlativeprocess spectrum of species distribution models with respect to core assumptions, model building and selection strategies, validation, uncertainties, common errors and the questions they are most suited to answer. The extremes of such approaches differ clearly in many aspects, such as model building approaches, parameter estimation strategies and transferability. However, they also share strengths and weaknesses. We show that claims of one approach being intrinsically superior to the other are misguided and that they ignore the processcorrelation continuum as well as the domains of questions that each approach is addressing. Nonetheless, the application of process-based approaches to species distribution modelling lags far behind more correlative (process-implicit) methods and more research is required to explore their potential benefits. Critical issues for the employment of species distribution modelling approaches are given, together with a guideline for appropriate usage. We close with challenges for future development of process-explicit species distribution models and how they may complement current approaches to study species distributions.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{PagelSchurr2012,
  author    = {Pagel, J{\"o}rn and Schurr, Frank Martin},
  title     = {Forecasting species ranges by statistical estimation of ecological niches and spatial population dynamics},
  series = {Global ecology and biogeography : a journal of macroecology},
  volume    = {21},
  journal   = {Global ecology and biogeography : a journal of macroecology},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Malden},
  issn      = {1466-822X},
  doi       = {10.1111/j.1466-8238.2011.00663.x},
  pages     = {293 -- 304},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Aim The study and prediction of speciesenvironment relationships is currently mainly based on species distribution models. These purely correlative models neglect spatial population dynamics and assume that species distributions are in equilibrium with their environment. This causes biased estimates of species niches and handicaps forecasts of range dynamics under environmental change. Here we aim to develop an approach that statistically estimates process-based models of range dynamics from data on species distributions and permits a more comprehensive quantification of forecast uncertainties. Innovation We present an approach for the statistical estimation of process-based dynamic range models (DRMs) that integrate Hutchinson's niche concept with spatial population dynamics. In a hierarchical Bayesian framework the environmental response of demographic rates, local population dynamics and dispersal are estimated conditional upon each other while accounting for various sources of uncertainty. The method thus: (1) jointly infers species niches and spatiotemporal population dynamics from occurrence and abundance data, and (2) provides fully probabilistic forecasts of future range dynamics under environmental change. In a simulation study, we investigate the performance of DRMs for a variety of scenarios that differ in both ecological dynamics and the data used for model estimation. Main conclusions Our results demonstrate the importance of considering dynamic aspects in the collection and analysis of biodiversity data. In combination with informative data, the presented framework has the potential to markedly improve the quantification of ecological niches, the process-based understanding of range dynamics and the forecasting of species responses to environmental change. It thereby strengthens links between biogeography, population biology and theoretical and applied ecology.},
  language  = {en}
}