Using a Random Forest Model and Public Data to Predict the Distribution of Prey for Marine Wildlife Management


Modern wildlife management relies on studies investigating the distribution patterns and habitat selection of wildlife at appropriately large scales for decision-making. One important aspect to consider in the assessment of habitat suitability and the underlying mechanism of animal distribution is the spatial distribution of their food resources. In marine areas, where many mammal and bird species occur over large spatial scales, the analysis of habitat use and distribution patterns requires information on the distribution of food resources at appropriately large scales (Huettmann and Diamond 2006). An important food resource for several species of marine birds and mammals are invertebrate organisms that live on the bottom of the sea and are collectively described as the benthos, a community that is especially productive and diverse at high latitudes (Carey 1991; Piepenburg 2005; Starmans et al. 1999). The distribution and productivity of benthic foragers such as ice seals, walrus (Odobenus rosmarus), sea ducks (Somateria spp., Melanitta spp.), and gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) is influenced by the distribution of accessible benthic prey resources (Kaiser et al. 2006; Lovvorn et al. 2003; Moore et al. 2003). Benthic invertebrates thus form a key component in the trophic structure of marine ecosystems, and the distribution of marine benthic invertebrates is of major interest to wildlife managers (Solan et al. 2004). Most of the species mentioned above are of management concern, and either are (Spectacled Eider, Somateria fischeri; Steller's Eider, Polysticta stelleri) or have been proposed (walrus, ice seals) to be listed as ‘threatened’. Therefore, the identification and delineation of critical habitat providing sufficient food resources for these species will become extremely important in the near future.


Random Forest Model Boost Regression Tree Gray Whale Random Forest Algorithm Benthic Biomass 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Breiman L (2001a) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Breiman L (2001b) Statistical modeling: The two cultures. Stat Sci 16:199–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CG (1984) Classification and regression trees. Wadsworth International Group, Belmont, CAGoogle Scholar
  4. Carey AG (1991) Ecology of North American Arctic continental shelf benthos. Cont Shelf Res 11:865–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Craig E, Huettmann F (2008) Using ‘blackbox’ algorithms such as Treenet and Random Forests for data-mining and for finding meaningful patterns, relationships and outliers in complex ecological data: An overview, an example using Golden Eagle satellite data and an outlook for a promising future. In: Wang HF (ed) Intelligent data analysis: Developing new methodologies through pattern discovery and recovery. IGI Global, Hershey, PA, USA, pp 65–84Google Scholar
  6. Cutler DR et al. (2007) Random Forests for classification in ecology. Ecology 88:2783–2792CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. De'ath G, Fabricius KE (2000) Classification and regression trees: A powerful yet simple technique for ecological data analysis. Ecology 81:3178–3192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denisenko SG, Denisenko NV, Lehtonen KK, Andersin A-B, Laine AO (2003) Macrozoobenthos of the Pechora Sea (SE Barents Sea): community structure and spatial distribution in relation to environmental conditions. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 258:109–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dormann CF (2007) Effects of incorporating spatial autocorrelation into the analysis of species distribution data. Global Ecol Biogeog 16:129–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dunton KH, Goodall JL, Schonberg SV, Grebmeier JM, Maidment DR (2005) Multi-decadal synthesis of benthic—pelagic coupling in the western arctic: role of cross-shelf advective processes. Deep-Sea Res Pt II 52:3462–3477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elith J et al. (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elith J, Leathwick JR, Hastie T (2008) A working guide to boosted regression trees. J Anim Ecol 77:802–813CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ellis J et al. (2006) Predicting macrofaunal species distributions in estuarine gradients using logistic regression and classification systems. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 316:69–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Feder HM, Naidu AS, Jewett SC, Hameedi JM, Johnson WR, Whitledge TE (1994) The northeastern Chukchi Sea — benthos-environmental interactions. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 111:171–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Feder HM, Norton DW, Geller JB (2003) A review of apparent 20th century changes in the presence of mussels (Mytilus trossulus) and macroalgae in Arctic Alaska, and of historical and paleontological evidence used to relate mollusc distributions to climate change. Arctic 56:391–407Google Scholar
  16. Freese L, Auster PJ, Heifetz J, Wing BL (1999) Effects of trawling on seafloor habitat and associated invertebrate taxa in the Gulf of Alaska. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 182:119–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gradinger R (1995) Climate change and biological oceanography of the Arctic Ocean. Philos Transact A Math Phys Eng Sci 352:277–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grebmeier JM (1987) The ecology of benthic carbon cycling in the northern Bering and Chukchi Seas. In: Institute of Marine Science. University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AKGoogle Scholar
  19. Grebmeier JM (1993) Studies of pelagic-benthic coupling extended onto the Soviet continental shelf in the northern Bering and Chukchi seas. Cont Shelf Res 13:653–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grebmeier JM, McRoy CP, Feder HM (1988) Pelagic-benthic coupling on the shelf of the northern Bering and Chukchi seas I. Food supply source and benthic biomass. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 48:57–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grebmeier JM, Cooper LW, Feder HM, Sirenko BI (2006a) Ecosystem dynamics of the Pacific-influenced Northern Bering and Chukchi Seas in the Amerasian Arctic. Prog Oceanogr 71:331–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grebmeier JM et al. (2006b) A major ecosystem shift in the Northern Bering Sea. Science 311:1461–1464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gutt J (2001) On the direct impact of ice on marine benthic communities, a review. Polar Biol 24:553–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Halpern BS et al. (2008) A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. Science 319:948–952CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Hochachka WM et al. (2007) Data-mining discovery of pattern and process in ecological systems. J Wildl Manag 71:2427–2437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hovelsrud GK, McKenna M, Huntington HP (2008) Marine mammal harvests and other interactions with humans. Ecol Appl 18:S135–S147CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Huettmann F (2007) Modern adaptive management: Adding digital opportunities towards a sustainable world with new values. For Pub Pol Clim Change Sust Develop 3:337–342Google Scholar
  28. Huettmann F, Diamond A (2006) Large-scale effects on the spatial distribution of seabirds in the Northwest Atlantic. Landsc Ecol 21:1089–1108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jones D, Bett B, Tyler P (2007) Depth-related changes to density, diversity and structure of ben-thic megafaunal assemblages in the Fimbul ice shelf region, Weddell Sea, Antarctica. Polar Biol 30:1579–1592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaiser MJ et al. (2006) Distribution and behaviour of Common Scoter Melanitta nigra relative to prey resources and environmental parameters. Ibis 148:110–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kerr RA (2002) A warmer Arctic means change for all. Science 297:1490–1493CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Krajick K (2007) Thriving Arctic bottom dwellers could get strangled by warming. Science 315:1527CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Leathwick JR, Elith J, Francis MP, Hastie T, Taylor P (2006) Variation in demersal fish species richness in the oceans surrounding New Zealand: an analysis using boosted regression trees. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 321:267–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lovvorn JE, Richman SE, Grebmeier JM, Cooper LW (2003) Diet and body condition of spectacled eiders wintering in pack ice of the Bering Sea. Polar Biol 26:259–267Google Scholar
  35. Lovvorn JR, Cooper LW, Brooks ML, De Ruyck CC, Bump JK, Grebmeier JM (2005) Organic matter pathways to zooplankton and benthos under pack ice in late winter and open water in late summer in the north-central Bering Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 291:135–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lovvorn JR, Grebmeier JM, Cooper LW, Bump JK, Richman SE (2009) Modeling marine protected areas for threatened eiders in a climatically changing Bering Sea. Ecol Appl 19:1596–1613. doi:10.1890/08-193.1CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Moore SE, Grebmeier JM, Davies JR (2003) Gray whale distribution relative to forage habitat in the northern Bering Sea: current conditions and retrospective summary. Can J Zool 81:734–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mueter FJ, Litzow MA (2008) Sea ice retreat alters the biogeography of the Bering Sea continental shelf. Ecol Appl 18:309–320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Nilsen M, Pedersen T, Nilssen EM (2006) Macrobenthic biomass, productivity (P/B) and production in a high-latitude ecosystem, North Norway. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 321:67–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oppel S, Powell AN, Dickson DL (2009) Using an algorithmic model to reveal individually variable movement decisions in a wintering sea duck. J Anim Ecol 78:524–531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Panteleev GG, Stabeno P, Luchin VA, Nechaev DA, Ikeda M (2006) Summer transport estimates of the Kamchatka Current derived as a variational inverse of hydrophysical and surface drifter data. Geophys Res Lett 33:5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Piepenburg D (2005) Recent research on Arctic benthos: common notions need to be revised. Polar Biol 28:733–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Prasad AM, Iverson LR, Liaw A (2006) Newer classification and regression tree techniques: bagging and random forests for ecological prediction. Ecosystems 9:181–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ruhl HA (2007) Abundance and size distribution dynamics of abyssal epibenthic megafauna in the northeast Pacific. Ecology 88:1250–1262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Smale D (2008) Continuous benthic community change along a depth gradient in Antarctic shallows: evidence of patchiness but not zonation. Polar Biol 31:189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smale DA (2007) Ice disturbance intensity structures benthic communities in nearshore Antarctic waters. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 349:89–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Solan M, Cardinale BJ, Downing AL, Engelhardt KAM, Ruesink JL, Srivastava DS (2004) Extinction and ecosystem function in the marine benthos. Science 306:1177–1180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Starmans A, Gutt J, Arntz WE (1999) Mega-epibenthic communities in Arctic and Antarctic shelf areas. Mar Biol 135:269–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stoker S (1981) Benthic invertebrate macrofauna of the eastern Bering/Chukchi continental shelf. In: DW H, AG C (eds) The Eastern Bering Sea Shelf: Oceanography and Resources, vol 2. Unversity of Washington Press, Seattle, WA, pp. 1069–1091Google Scholar
  50. Strobl C, Boulesteix A-L, Zeileis A, Hothorn T (2007) Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution. BMC Bioinformatics 8:25–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Sugden H, Lenz M, Molis M, Wahl M, Thomason JC (2008) The interaction between nutrient availability and disturbance frequency on the diversity of benthic marine communities on the north-east coast of England. J Anim Ecol 77:24–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Thrush SF, Hewitt JE, Norkko A, Nicholls PE, Funnell GA, Ellis JI (2003) Habitat change in estuaries: predicting broad-scale responses of intertidal macrofauna to sediment mud content. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 263:101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tumbiolo ML, Downing JA (1994) An empirical model for the prediction of secondary production in marine benthic invertebrate populations. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 114:165–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ysebaert T, Herman PMJ (2002) Spatial and temporal variation in benthic macrofauna and relationships with environmental variables in an estuarine, intertidal soft-sediment environment. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 244:105–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Royal Society for the Protection of BirdsBedfordshireUK

Personalised recommendations