Ahmed El-Gabbas

Invasive alien species (IAS) threaten biodiversity and human well-being. These threats may increase in the future, necessitating accurate projections of potential locations and the extent of invasions. The main aim of the IAS prototype Digital Twin (IAS pDT) is to dynamically project the level of plant invasion at habitat level across Europe under current and future climates using joint species distribution models. The pDT detects updates in data sources and versions of the datasets and model outputs, implementing the FAIR principles. The pDT’s outputs will be available via an interactive dashboard. All input and output data will be freely accessible.

Aim: Species distribution models (SDMs) are essential tools in ecology and conservation. However, the scarcity of visual sightings of marine mammals in remote polar areas hinders the effective application of SDMs there. Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) data provide year‐round information and overcome foul weather limitations faced by visual surveys. However, the use of PAM data in SDMs has been sparse so far. Here, we use PAM‐based SDMs to investigate the spatiotemporal distribution of the critically endangered Antarctic blue whale in the Weddell Sea.Location: The Weddell Sea.Methods: We used presence‐only dynamic SDMs employing visual sightings and PAM detections in independent models. We compared the two independent models with a third combined model that integrated both visual and PAM data, aiming at leveraging the advantages of each data type: the extensive spatial extent of visual data and the broader temporal/environmental range of PAM data.Results: Visual and PAM data prove complementary, as indicated by a low spatial overlap between daily predictions and the low predictability of each model at detections of other data types. Combined data models reproduced suitable habitats as given by both independent models. Visual data models indicate areas close to the sea ice edge (SIE) and with low‐to‐moderate sea ice concentrations (SIC) as suitable, while PAM data models identified suitable habitats at a broader range of distances to SIE and relatively higher SIC.Main Conclusions: The results demonstrate the potential of PAM data to predict year‐round marine mammal habitat suitability at large spatial scales. We provide reasons for discrepancies between SDMs based on either data type and give methodological recommendations on using PAM data in SDMs. Combining visual and PAM data in future SDMs is promising for studying vocalized animals, particularly when using recent advances in integrated distribution modelling methods.

Understanding cetacean distribution is essential for conservation planning and decision-making, particularly in regions subject to rapid environmental changes. Nevertheless, information on their spatiotemporal distribution is commonly limited, especially from remote areas. Species distribution models (SDMs) are powerful tools, relating species occurrences to environmental variables to predict the species' potential distribution. This study aims at using presence-only SDMs (MaxEnt) to identify suitable habitats for fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) on their Nordic and Barents Seas feeding grounds. We used spatial-block cross-validation to tune MaxEnt parameters and evaluate model performance using spatially independent testing data. We considered spatial sampling bias correction using four methods. Important environmental variables were distance to shore and sea ice edge, variability of sea surface temperature and sea surface salinity, and depth. Suitable fin whale habitats were predicted along the west coast of Svalbard, between Svalbard and the eastern Norwegian Sea, coastal areas off Iceland and southern East Greenland, and along the Knipovich Ridge to Jan Mayen. Results support that presence-only SDMs are effective tools to predict cetacean habitat suitability, particularly in remote areas like the Arctic Ocean. SDMs constitute a cost-effective method for targeting future surveys and identifying top priority sites for conservation measures.

Species distribution models (SDMs) relate species information to environmental conditions to predict potential species distributions. The majority of SDMs are static, relating species presence information to long-term average environmental conditions. The resulting temporal mismatch between species information and environmental conditions can increase model inference’s uncertainty. For SDMs to capture the dynamic species-environment relationships and predict near-real-time habitat suitability, species information needs to be spatiotemporally matched with environmental conditions contemporaneous to the species’ presence (dynamic SDMs). Implementing dynamic SDMs in the marine realm is highly challenging, particularly due to species and environmental data paucity and spatiotemporally biases. Here, we implemented presence-only dynamic SDMs for four migratory baleen whale species in the Southern Ocean (SO): Antarctic minke, Antarctic blue, fin, and humpback whales. Sightings were spatiotemporally matched with their respective daily environmental predictors. Background information was sampled daily to describe the dynamic environmental conditions in the highly dynamic SO. We corrected for spatial sampling bias by sampling background information respective to the seasonal research efforts. Independent model evaluation was performed on spatial and temporal cross-validation. We predicted the circumantarctic year-round habitat suitability of each species. Daily predictions were also summarized into bi-weekly and monthly habitat suitability. We identified important predictors and species suitability responses to environmental changes. Our results support the propitious use of dynamic SDMs to fill species information gaps and improve conservation planning strategies. Near-real-time predictions can be used for dynamic ocean management, e.g., to examine the overlap between habitat suitability and human activities. Nevertheless, the inevitable spatiotemporal biases in sighting data from the SO call for the need for improving sampling effort in the SO and using alternative data sources (e.g., passive acoustic monitoring) in future SDMs. We further discuss challenges of calibrating dynamic SDMs on baleen whale species in the SO, with a particular focus on spatiotemporal sampling bias issues and how background information should be sampled in presence-only dynamic SDMs. We also highlight the need to integrate visual and acoustic data in future SDMs on baleen whales for better coverage of environmental conditions suitable for the species and avoid constraints of using either data type alone.

Humpback whales are thought to undertake annual migrations between their low latitude breeding grounds and high latitude feeding grounds. However, under specific conditions, humpback whales sometimes change their migratory destination or skip migration overall. Here we document the surprising persistent presence of humpback whales in the Atlantic sector of the Southern Ocean during five years (2011, 2012, 2013, 2017, and 2018) using passive acoustic data. However, in the El Niño years 2015 and 2016, humpback whales were virtually absent. Our data show that humpback whales are systematically present in the Atlantic sector of the Southern Ocean and suggest that these whales are particularly sensitive to climate oscillations which have profound effects on winds, sea ice extent, primary production, and especially krill productivity.

Aim: Information on the spatio‐temporal distribution of marine species is essential for developing proactive management strategies. However, sufficient information is seldom available at large spatial scales, particularly in polar areas. The Southern Ocean (SO) represents a critical habitat for various species, particularly migratory baleen whales. Still, the SO’s remoteness and sea ice coverage disallow obtaining sufficient information on baleen whale distribution and niche preference. Here, we used presence‐only species distribution models to predict the circumantarctic habitat suitability of baleen whales and identify important predictors affecting their distribution.Location: The Southern Ocean (SO).Methods: We used Maxent to model habitat suitability for Antarctic minke, Antarctic blue, fin and humpback whales. Our models employ extensive circumantarctic data and carefully prepared predictors describing the SO’s environment and two spatial sampling bias correction options. Species‐specific spatial‐block cross‐validation was used to optimize model complexity and for spatially independent model evaluation.Results: Model performance was high on cross‐validation, with generally little predicted uncertainty. The most important predictors were derived from sea ice, particularly seasonal mean and variability of sea ice concentration and distance to the sea ice edge.Main conclusions: Our models support the usefulness of presence‐only models as a cost‐effective tool in the marine realm, particularly for studying the migratory whales’ distribution. However, we found discrepancies between our results and (within) results of similar studies, mainly due to using different species data quality and quantity, different study area extent and methodological reasons. We further highlight the limitations of implementing static distribution models in the highly dynamic marine realm. Dynamic models, which relate species information to environmental conditions contemporaneous to species occurrences, can predict near‐real‐time habitat suitability, necessary for dynamic management. Nevertheless, obtaining sufficient species and environmental predictors at high spatio‐temporal resolution, necessary for dynamic models, can be challenging from polar regions.

Background: Spatial conservation prioritisation (SCP) is a set of computational tools designed to support the efficient spatial allocation of priority areas for conservation actions, but it is subject to many sources of uncertainty which should be accounted for during the prioritisation process. We quantified the sensitivity of an SCP application (using software Zonation) to possible sources of uncertainty in data-poor situations, including the use of different surrogate options; correction for sampling bias; how to integrate connectivity; the choice of species distribution modelling (SDM) algorithm; how cells are removed from the landscape; and two methods of assigning weights to species (red-list status or prediction uncertainty). Further, we evaluated the effectiveness of the Egyptian protected areas for conservation, and spatially allocated the top priority sites for further on-the-ground evaluation as potential areas for protected areas expansion. Results: Focal taxon (butterflies, reptiles, and mammals), sampling bias, connectivity and the choice of SDM algorithm were the most sensitive parameters; collectively these reflect data quality issues. In contrast, cell removal rule and species weights contributed much less to overall variability. Using currently available species data, we found the current effectiveness of Egypt’s protected areas for conserving fauna was low. Conclusions: For SCP to be useful, there is a lower limit on data quality, requiring data-poor countries to improve sampling strategies and data quality to obtain unbiased data for as many taxa as possible. Since our sensitivity analysis may not generalise, conservation planners should use sensitivity analyses more routinely, particularly relying on more than one combination of SDM algorithm and surrogate group, consider correction for sampling bias, and compare the spatial patterns of predicted priority sites using a variety of settings. The sensitivity of SCP to connectivity parameters means that the responses of each species to habitat loss are important knowledge gaps.

Species distribution modeling (SDM) is an essential method in ecology and conservation. SDMs are often calibrated within one country's borders, typically along a limited environmental gradient with biased and incomplete data, making the quality of these models questionable. In this study, we evaluated how adequate are national presence‐only data for calibrating regional SDMs. We trained SDMs for Egyptian bat species at two different scales: only within Egypt and at a species‐specific global extent. We used two modeling algorithms: Maxent and elastic net, both under the point‐process modeling framework. For each modeling algorithm, we measured the congruence of the predictions of global and regional models for Egypt, assuming that the lower the congruence, the lower the appropriateness of the Egyptian dataset to describe the species' niche. We inspected the effect of incorporating predictions from global models as additional predictor (“prior”) to regional models, and quantified the improvement in terms of AUC and the congruence between regional models run with and without priors. Moreover, we analyzed predictive performance improvements after correction for sampling bias at both scales. On average, predictions from global and regional models in Egypt only weakly concur. Collectively, the use of priors did not lead to much improvement: similar AUC and high congruence between regional models calibrated with and without priors. Correction for sampling bias led to higher model performance, whatever prior used, making the use of priors less pronounced. Under biased and incomplete sampling, the use of global bats data did not improve regional model performance. Without enough bias‐free regional data, we cannot objectively identify the actual improvement of regional models after incorporating information from the global niche. However, we still believe in great potential for global model predictions to guide future surveys and improve regional sampling in data‐poor regions.

Species distribution modelling (SDM) has become an essential method in ecology and conservation. In the absence of survey data, the majority of SDMs are calibrated with opportunistic presence‐only data, incurring substantial sampling bias. We address the challenge of correcting for sampling bias in the data‐sparse situations. We modelled the relative intensity of bat records in their entire range using three modelling algorithms under the point‐process modelling framework (GLMs with subset selection, GLMs fitted with an elastic‐net penalty, and Maxent). To correct for sampling bias, we applied model‐based bias correction by incorporating spatial information on site accessibility or sampling efforts. We evaluated the effect of bias correction on the models’ predictive performance (AUC and TSS), calculated on spatial‐block cross‐validation and a holdout data set. When evaluated with independent, but also sampling‐biased test data, correction for sampling bias led to improved predictions. The predictive performance of the three modelling algorithms was very similar. Elastic‐net models have intermediate performance, with slight advantage for GLMs on cross‐validation and Maxent on hold‐out evaluation. Model‐based bias correction is very useful in data‐sparse situations, where detailed data are not available to apply other bias correction methods. However, bias correction success depends on how well the selected bias variables describe the sources of bias. In this study, accessibility covariates described bias in our data better than the effort covariate, and their use led to larger changes in predictive performance. Objectively evaluating bias correction requires bias‐free presence–absence test data, and without them the real improvement for describing a species’ environmental niche cannot be assessed.

(2016). The Desert Beauty Calopieris eulimene: a butterfly new to Egypt (Insecta: Lepidoptera) Zoology in the Middle East: Vol. 62, No. 3, pp. 279-281.