Evaluation of consensus methods in predictive species distribution modelling
- DOI
- 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00491.x
- Published
- 2009
- Container
- Diversity and Distributions
- Publisher
- Not recorded
- Open access
- yes
Credibility signals
limited evidence Score 45/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.
Show all credibility signals
- cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response.
- cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response.
- not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility.
- not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- supportingOpen access status: Normalized open-access status: open.
- not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored.
- cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty.
Cite this work
BibTeX
@article{allodium:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00491.x,
title = {Evaluation of consensus methods in predictive species distribution modelling},
author = {M. Marmion and M. Parviainen and M. Luoto and R. K. Heikkinen and W. Thuiller},
year = {2009},
journal = {Diversity and Distributions},
doi = {10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00491.x},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00491.x}
}RIS
TY - JOUR TI - Evaluation of consensus methods in predictive species distribution modelling AU - M. Marmion AU - M. Parviainen AU - M. Luoto AU - R. K. Heikkinen AU - W. Thuiller PY - 2009 JO - Diversity and Distributions DO - 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00491.x UR - https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00491.x ER -
APA
Marmion, M., Parviainen, M., Luoto, M., Heikkinen, R. K., & Thuiller, W. (2009). Evaluation of consensus methods in predictive species distribution modelling. Diversity and Distributions. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00491.x
Source records
- hal · retrieved 2026-09-25T23:55:36.647Z