False negatives – A false problem in studies of habitat selection?

Abstract

Habitat use and resource selection studies based on presence-only data often use simulated locations as a benchmark for comparison with locations where a species has been observed. Such designs, termed "use-versus-availability", are commonly analyzed with logistic regression, resulting in resource selection functions (RSFs). Statistical ecologists have recently expressed concerns about the appropriateness of case-control logistic regression for the calculation of RSFs, based on the claim that given enough time available locations may be used by the target species, thus creating "false negatives" and violating the assumption that the two outcomes, use and availability, are mutually exclusive. Accordingly, statistical ecologists propose alternative methods to address the latter concern. We argue that simulated absence data can be interpreted as true absences, hence amenable to case-control logistic regression, when absence data are considered as paired instantaneously in time with presence-only data.