bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2025.05.01.651656

Field-validation of multiple species distribution models shows variation in performance for predicting Aedes albopictus distributions at the invasion edge

Abstract

Climate and land use changes have resulted in range expansion of many species. In this shifting disease landscape, it is important to leverage tools that can predict the potential distributions of invading vectors to target surveillance and control efforts and identify at risk populations. Species Distribution Models (SDMs) are widely used to predict ranges of invasive species; however, invasive species often violate assumptions of equilibrium and niche conservatism. Moreover, these studies are rarely validated using independent data. Here, we use long-term mosquito surveillance data for Aedes albopictus, a highly invasive mosquito capable of transmitting several arboviruses, at its range-edge to evaluate a variety of SDMs (MaxEnt, GAM, Random Forest, Boosted Regression Tree) in predicting Ae. albopictus range. We identify key environmental drivers of distributions and areas where models tended to disagree in predicting occurrence. At sites where models disagree, we sampled for Ae. albopictus to generate an independent dataset for field-validation of models in addition to the common practice of cross-validation. Finally, we determine if models based on early invasion data can predict later stage invasion ranges. We found that landscape and climatic variables are important drivers of population distributions. SDM methods varied in predictive accuracy between models and across validation methods (i.e. cross-vs. field-validation). GAM and MaxEnt best predicted later-stage invasion distributions, requiring fewer years of training data. Our work shows that SDMs can be useful tools to predict the ranges of invasive species and highlights the importance of comparing predictions of invasive species range. Author SummaryMosquitoes are greatly impacted by their surrounding environment. Environmental changes such as those driven by climate change or changes in land use (i.e. urbanization, etc.) can have profound impacts on mosquito ranges. Species distribution models (SDMs), which use the occurrence data of a species in combination with environmental data (e.g., landscape characteristics, temperature, etc.) to estimate suitable habitats for the species, are helpful tools to understand how species ranges can change with the environment through time and space. There are many different species distribution models to choose from - each with different methods for estimating suitable habitat - making it important to compare the performance of different models. Furthermore, because invasive species often violate assumptions of SDMs, it is important to rigorously explore how different methods perform when predicting invasive species ranges in newly invaded areas. In this study, we tested the predictive accuracy of different species distribution models, and we found it varied across modeling and validation method. We also tested whether models could use early-stage invasion data to predict the late-stage invasion distributions of Ae. albopictus. We found that some modeling methods performed well while others needed more data to improve accuracy of late-stage invasion range predictions. In summary, when modeling species ranges using SDMs, it is important to use multiple methods and compare results because methods will likely disagree, and further sampling may be required to determine which model is most accurate.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Shattuck, A. V., Hollingsworth, B. D., Skrotzki, J., Campbell, S. R., Romano, C. L., Murdock, C. C.. 2025-05-07. Field-validation of multiple species distribution models shows variation in performance for predicting Aedes albopictus distributions at the invasion edge. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.05.01.651656

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

Beyond Single-Metric Assessments: Uncovering Masked Butterfly Declines via Multi-Scalar Analysis in Central Alberta

1. This study analyzed 21 years (2000-2025) of butterfly count data from Central Alberta, integrated with intensive 5-year (2021-2025) high-resolution intra-seasonal sampling. 2. Long-term macro-scale analysis revealed a significant decline in Shannon Diversity, a change that remained obscured when relying solely on traditional metrics of species richness and evenness. 3. This diversity decline was primarily driven by the severe, long-term collapse of the native Common Ringlet (Coenonympha tullia). 4. Four other dominant species--Cabbage White (Pieris rapae), Clouded Sulphur (Colias eriphyle), European Skipper (Thymelicus lineola), and Common Wood Nymph (Cercyonis pegala)--maintained long-term population stability, though their abundances were significantly constrained by extreme winter minimum temperatures and rapid spring warming. 5. High-resolution intra-seasonal analysis (2021-2025) demonstrated that community indices and species-specific abundances were strongly limited by daily weather, particularly wind velocity and temperature. 6. These findings illustrate that while traditional metrics like richness and evenness are fundamental to community ecology, they provide incomplete insights when applied in isolation; they are most effective when utilized as part of a complementary, multi-scalar framework. 7. This study highlights the necessity of coupling multi-decadal historical datasets with high-frequency, fine-scale sampling to accurately identify the mechanisms of community turnover that simpler metrics may overlook. 8. The results underscore the critical importance of standardized citizen science monitoring in quantifying environmental impacts and establishing conservation priorities for terrestrial insect groups.

ecology↗

From concentration to export: resource contrasts and bee traits shape pollinator spillover to crops

Floral plantings can either concentrate bees or export them to adjacent crops, yet the ecological conditions influencing these outcomes remain unclear. Here, we develop a mathematical model as proof of concept for our previous integrative hypothesis: concentrator and exporter outcomes can arise as alternative, context-dependent outcomes of the same underlying resource-selection process. Using bees as a model and focusing specifically on spillover from floral plantings to crops, we identified resource-specific thresholds separating concentration- and export-favoring conditions. Our model translates differences in relative patch attractiveness into context-dependent concentration and export outcomes and generates resource-specific, testable predictions about the conditions favoring pollinator movement into crops. In our simulations, the concentrator-exporter transition occurred at a lower flowering-intensity contrast than at pollen or nectar contrasts, which suggests that flowering intensity may provide an initial cue for bee movement, whereas nectar and pollen rewards refine or sustain bee responses once crops are perceived as attractive. Spillover thresholds differed among resource contrasts, whereas response steepness varied across bee-trait and community scenarios. Under the model's trait-sensitivity formulation, predicted spillover probability responded more strongly to flowering contrast for specialists than for generalists; colony size amplified this response, whereas bee richness dampened it. Together, these patterns show how flowering and resource contrasts interact with bee traits and community context to shape predicted spillover. Our results confirm that the concentrator and exporter hypotheses can be understood as context-dependent outcomes of the same ecological process rather than as mutually exclusive alternatives. Experimental tests of the predicted thresholds conducted in the field could reveal when and where floral plantings are most likely to promote bee spillover to crops, potentially supporting crop pollination.

ecology↗

A Computational Re-evaluation of Spatial Trials for Zoonotic Tuberculosis Control: Model Misspecification, Diagnostic Miss-classification, and the Illusion of Wildlife Culling Efficacy

1. Wildlife reservoir management frequently relies on the Randomised Badger Culling Trial's (RBCT) trade-off hypothesis, which posits that reductions in cattle herd infections are offset by a perturbation effect driven by disrupted host dispersal. This paper evaluates the computational and epidemiological robustness of this historical trial, which serves as the foundational empirical experiment guiding zoonotic tuberculosis (Mycobacterium bovis) control policies. 2. Using generalized linear mixed models with a generalized Poisson error distribution to explicitly address historical data overdispersion, this study contrasts traditional parametric inference against exact cluster-constrained permutation tests across distinct operational definitions of disease incidence. 3. Non-parametric diagnostics reveal that previously reported treatment and perturbation effects render as statistical artifacts under exact non-parametric permutation. Inside culling zones, parametric significance fails to withstand exact permutation verification due to extreme data leverage in localized cluster blocks. 4. Crucially, when diagnostic misclassification biases are eliminated by analysing total reactor datasets, all apparent culling effects disappear, and information criteria overwhelmingly favour nested null architectures. Unconfirmed reactors likely represent true biological infections missed by low-sensitivity post-mortem macro-necropsy, proving that host removal tracks observation noise rather than genuine zoonotic transmission pathways. 5. Finally, empirical scaling conducted in this study identifies a novel mathematical saturation effect, demonstrating that this sub-linear scaling is an operational artifact of unmodelled herd-level disease recurrence over time. 6. Policy implications. Because current zoonotic tuberculosis intervention frameworks are built upon a structurally misspecified statistical model, they have driven large-scale veterinary policies resulting in substantial, unevidenced ecological and economic interventions while failing to provide genuine public health, animal health, or disease control benefits.

ecology↗