These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36820245)

  • 1. MaxEnt brings comparable results when the input data are being completed; Model parameterization of four species distribution models.
    Ahmadi M; Hemami MR; Kaboli M; Shabani F
    Ecol Evol; 2023 Feb; 13(2):e9827. PubMed ID: 36820245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Validation of presence-only models for conservation planning and the application to whales in a multiple-use marine park.
    Smith JN; Kelly N; Renner IW
    Ecol Appl; 2021 Jan; 31(1):e02214. PubMed ID: 32761934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison of absolute performance of different correlative and mechanistic species distribution models in an independent area.
    Shabani F; Kumar L; Ahmadi M
    Ecol Evol; 2016 Aug; 6(16):5973-86. PubMed ID: 27547370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison between optimized MaxEnt and random forest modeling in predicting potential distribution: A case study with Quasipaa boulengeri in China.
    Zhao Z; Xiao N; Shen M; Li J
    Sci Total Environ; 2022 Oct; 842():156867. PubMed ID: 35752245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The predictive performance and stability of six species distribution models.
    Duan RY; Kong XQ; Huang MY; Fan WY; Wang ZG
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(11):e112764. PubMed ID: 25383906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Why choose Random Forest to predict rare species distribution with few samples in large undersampled areas? Three Asian crane species models provide supporting evidence.
    Mi C; Huettmann F; Guo Y; Han X; Wen L
    PeerJ; 2017; 5():e2849. PubMed ID: 28097060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Predicting habitat suitability for rare plants at local spatial scales using a species distribution model.
    Gogol-Prokurat M
    Ecol Appl; 2011 Jan; 21(1):33-47. PubMed ID: 21516886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A novel hybrid model for species distribution prediction using neural networks and Grey Wolf Optimizer algorithm.
    Zhang HT; Yang TT; Wang WT
    Sci Rep; 2024 May; 14(1):11505. PubMed ID: 38769379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Predicting the distribution of a rare chipmunk (
    Perkins-Taylor IE; Frey JK
    J Mammal; 2020 Aug; 101(4):1035-1048. PubMed ID: 33033469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Usutu virus induced mass mortalities of songbirds in Central Europe: Are habitat models suitable to predict dead birds in unsampled regions?
    Walter M; Brugger K; Rubel F
    Prev Vet Med; 2018 Nov; 159():162-170. PubMed ID: 30314779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Ground Validation Reveals Limited Applicability of Species Distribution Models for Dakota Skipper (Hesperia dacotae, Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) Recovery Efforts in Canada.
    Dearborn KD; Murray C; Westwood R
    Environ Entomol; 2022 Dec; 51(6):1249-1261. PubMed ID: 36305750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Lowland tapir distribution and habitat loss in South America.
    Cordeiro JL; Fragoso JM; Crawshaw D; Oliveira LF
    PeerJ; 2016; 4():e2456. PubMed ID: 27672509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Impacts of physiological characteristics and human activities on the species distribution models of orchids taking the Hengduan Mountains as a case.
    Wang XM; Peng PH; Bai MY; Bai WQ; Zhang SQ; Feng Y; Wang J; Tang Y
    Ecol Evol; 2023 Oct; 13(10):e10566. PubMed ID: 37791293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluating Bayesian spatial methods for modelling species distributions with clumped and restricted occurrence data.
    Redding DW; Lucas TCD; Blackburn TM; Jones KE
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(11):e0187602. PubMed ID: 29190296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Investigation of a novel approach for aquaculture site selection.
    Falconer L; Telfer TC; Ross LG
    J Environ Manage; 2016 Oct; 181():791-804. PubMed ID: 27444724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Evaluating the performance of species distribution models Biomod2 and MaxEnt using the giant panda distribution data].
    Luo M; Wang H; Lyu Z
    Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao; 2017 Dec; 28(12):4001-4006. PubMed ID: 29696896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Maxent-directed field surveys identify new populations of narrowly endemic habitat specialists.
    Rhoden CM; Peterman WE; Taylor CA
    PeerJ; 2017; 5():e3632. PubMed ID: 28785520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effects of sampling bias and model complexity on the predictive performance of MaxEnt species distribution models.
    Syfert MM; Smith MJ; Coomes DA
    PLoS One; 2013; 8(2):e55158. PubMed ID: 23457462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Wrong, but useful: regional species distribution models may not be improved by range-wide data under biased sampling.
    El-Gabbas A; Dormann CF
    Ecol Evol; 2018 Feb; 8(4):2196-2206. PubMed ID: 29468036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effectiveness of species distribution models in predicting local abundance depends on model grain size.
    Brambilla M; Bazzi G; Ilahiane L
    Ecology; 2024 Feb; 105(2):e4224. PubMed ID: 38038251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.