EcoService Models Library (ESML)
Home
Search EMs
My
EMs 
Learn about
ESML
View ESML Data Maploading
Compare EMs
Which comparison is best for me?EM Variables by Variable Role
One quick way to compare ecological models (EMs) is by comparing their variables. Predictor variables show what kinds of influences a model is able to account for, and what kinds of data it requires. Response variables show what information a model is capable of estimating.
This first comparison shows the names (and units) of each EM’s variables, side-by-side, sorted by variable role. Variable roles in ESML are as follows:
- Predictor Variables
- Time- or Space-Varying Variables
- Constants and Parameters
- Intermediate (Computed) Variables
- Response Variables
- Computed Response Variables
- Measured Response Variables
EM Variables by Category
A second way to use variables to compare EMs is by focusing on the kind of information each variable represents. The top-level categories in the ESML Variable Classification Hierarchy are as follows:
- Policy Regarding Use or Management of Ecosystem Resources
- Land Surface (or Water Body Bed) Cover, Use or Substrate
- Human Demographic Data
- Human-Produced Stressor or Enhancer of Ecosystem Goods and Services Production
- Ecosystem Attributes and Potential Supply of Ecosystem Goods and Services
- Non-monetary Indicators of Human Demand, Use or Benefit of Ecosystem Goods and Services
- Monetary Values
Besides understanding model similarities, sorting the variables for each EM by these 7 categories makes it easier to see if the compared models can be linked using similar variables. For example, if one model estimates an ecosystem attribute (in Category 5), such as water clarity, as a response variable, and a second model uses a similar attribute (also in Category 5) as a predictor of recreational use, the two models can potentially be used in tandem. This comparison makes it easier to spot potential model linkages.
All EM Descriptors
This selection allows a more detailed comparison of EMs by model characteristics other than their variables. The 50-or-so EM descriptors for each model are presented, side-by-side, in the following categories:
- EM Identity and Description
- EM Modeling Approach
- EM Locations, Environments, Ecology
- EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system
EM Descriptors by Modeling Concepts
This feature guides the user through the use of the following seven concepts for comparing and selecting EMs:
- Conceptual Model
- Modeling Objective
- Modeling Context
- Potential for Model Linkage
- Feasibility of Model Use
- Model Certainty
- Model Structural Information
Though presented separately, these concepts are interdependent, and information presented under one concept may have relevance to other concepts as well.
Compare Criteria:
Show Criteria
Hide CriteriaEM Identity and Description
EM Identification
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
EM Short Name
em.detail.shortNameHelp
?
|
Wetland conservation for birds, Midwestern USA | Cultural ecosystem services, Bilbao, Spain | Coral taxa and land development, St.Croix, VI, USA | Red-winged blackbird abun, Piedmont region, USA | Pollutant dispersion by vegetation barriers |
|
EM Full Name
em.detail.fullNameHelp
?
|
Prioritizing wetland conservation for birds, Midwestern USA | Cultural ecosystem services, Bilbao, Spain | Coral taxa richness and land development, St.Croix, Virgin Islands, USA | Red-winged blackbird abundance, Piedmont ecoregion, USA | Pollutant dispersion by vegetation barriers |
|
EM Source or Collection
em.detail.emSourceOrCollectionHelp
?
|
None |
None ?Comment:EU Mapping Studies |
US EPA | None | US EPA |
|
EM Source Document ID
|
122 | 191 | 96 | 405 | 435 |
|
Document Author
em.detail.documentAuthorHelp
?
|
Thogmartin, W. A., Potter, B. A. and Soulliere, G. J. | Casado-Arzuaga, I., Onaindia, M., Madariaga, I. and Verburg P. H. | Oliver, L. M., Lehrter, J. C. and Fisher, W. S. | Riffel, S., Scognamillo, D., and L. W. Burger | Hashad, K. B. Yang, J. T. Steffens, R. W. Baldauf, P. Deshmukh, K. M. Zhang |
|
Document Year
em.detail.documentYearHelp
?
|
2011 | 2013 | 2011 | 2008 | 2021 |
|
Document Title
em.detail.sourceIdHelp
?
|
Bridging the conservation design and delivery gap for wetland bird habitat maintenance and restoration in the midwestern United States | Mapping recreation and aesthetic value of ecosystems in the Bilbao Metropolitan Greenbelt (northern Spain) to support landscape planning | Relating landscape development intensity to coral reef condition in the watersheds of St. Croix, US Virgin Islands | Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program on northern bobwhite and grassland birds | Parameterizing pollutant dispersion downwind of roadside vegetation barriers |
|
Document Status
em.detail.statusCategoryHelp
?
|
Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed but unpublished (explain in Comment) |
|
Comments on Status
em.detail.commentsOnStatusHelp
?
|
Published journal manuscript | Published journal manuscript | Published journal manuscript | Published journal manuscript | Journal manuscript submitted or in review |
Software and Access
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
| Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | |
|
Contact Name
em.detail.contactNameHelp
?
|
Wayne Thogmartin, USGS | Izaskun Casado-Arzuaga | Leah Oliver | Sam Riffell | K. Max Zhang |
|
Contact Address
|
Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, 2630 Fanta Reed Road, La Crosse, WI 54603 | Plant Biology and Ecology Department, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Campus de Leioa, Barrio Sarriena s/n, 48940 Leioa, Bizkaia, Spain | National Health and Environmental Research Effects Laboratory | Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA | Sibley School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA |
|
Contact Email
|
wthogmartin@usgs.gov | izaskun.casado@ehu.es | leah.oliver@epa.gov | sriffell@cfr.msstate.edu | kz33@cornell.edu |
EM Description
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
Summary Description
em.detail.summaryDescriptionHelp
?
|
ABSTRACT: "The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s adoption of Strategic Habitat Conservation is intended to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of conservation delivery by targeting effort in areas where biological benefits are greatest. Conservation funding has not often been allocated in accordance with explicit biological endpoints, and the gap between conservation design (the identification of conservation priority areas) and delivery needs to be bridged to better meet conservation goals for multiple species and landscapes. We introduce a regional prioritization scheme for North American Wetlands Conservation Act funding which explicitly addresses Midwest regional goals for wetland-dependent birds. We developed decision-support maps to guide conservation of breeding and non-breeding wetland bird habitat. This exercise suggested ~55% of the Midwest consists of potential wetland bird habitat, and areas suited for maintenance (protection) were distinguished from those most suited to restoration. Areas with greater maintenance focus were identified for central Minnesota, southeastern Wisconsin, the Upper Mississippi and Illinois rivers, and the shore of western Lake Erie and Saginaw Bay. The shores of Lakes Michigan and Superior accommodated fewer waterbird species overall, but were also important for wetland bird habitat maintenance. Abundant areas suited for wetland restoration occurred in agricultural regions of central Illinois, western Iowa, and northern Indiana and Ohio. Use of this prioritization scheme can increase effectiveness, efficiency, transparency, and credibility to land and water conservation efforts for wetland birds in the Midwestern United States." | ABSTRACT "This paper presents a method to quantify cultural ecosystem services (ES) and their spatial distribution in the landscape based on ecological structure and social evaluation approaches. The method aims to provide quantified assessments of ES to support land use planning decisions. A GIS-based approach was used to estimate and map the provision of recreation and aesthetic services supplied by ecosystems in a peri-urban area located in the Basque Country, northern Spain. Data of two different public participation processes (frequency of visits to 25 different sites within the study area and aesthetic value of different landscape units) were used to validate the maps. Three maps were obtained as results: a map showing the provision of recreation services, an aesthetic value map and a map of the correspondences and differences between both services. The data obtained in the participation processes were found useful for the validation of the maps. A weak spatial correlation was found between aesthetic quality and recreation provision services, with an overlap of the highest values for both services only in 7.2 % of the area. A consultation with decision-makers indicated that the results were considered useful to identify areas that can be targeted for improvement of landscape and recreation management." | AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "In this exploratory comparison, stony coral condition was related to watershed LULC and LDI values. We also compared the capacity of other potential human activity indicators to predict coral reef condition using multivariate analysis." (294) | ABSTRACT:"The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) has converted just over 36 million acres of cropland into potential wildlife habitat, primarily grassland. Thus, the CRP should benefit grassland songbirds, a group of species that is declining across the United States and is of conservation concern. Additionally, the CRP is an important part of multi-agency, regional efforts to restore northern bobwhite populations. However, comprehensive assessments of the wildlife benefits of CRP at regional scales are lacking. We used Breeding Bird Survey and National Resources Inventory data to assess the potential for the CRP to benefit northern bobwhite and other grassland birds with overlapping ranges and similar habitat associations. We built regression models for 15 species in seven different ecological regions. Forty-nine of 108 total models contained significant CRP effects (P < 0.05), and 48 of the 49 contained positive effects. Responses to CRP varied across ecological regions. Only eastern meadowlark was positively related to CRP in all the ecological regions, and western meadowlark was the only species never related to CRP. CRP was a strong predictor of bird abundance compared to other land cover types. The potential for CRP habitat as a regional conservation tool to benefit declining grassland bird populations should continue to be assessed at a variety of spatial scales. We caution that bird-CRP relations varied from region to region and among species. Because the NRI provides relatively coarse resolution information on CRP, more detailed information about CRP habitats (spatial arrangement, age of the habitat (time since planting), specific conservation practices used) should be included in future assessments to fully understand where and to what extent CRP can benefit grassland birds." | ABSTRACT: "Communities living and working in near-road environments are exposed to elevated levels of traffic-related air pollution (TRAP), causing adverse health effects. Roadside vegetation may help reduce TRAP through enhanced deposition and mixing….there are no studies that developed a dispersion model to characterize pollutant concentrations downwind of vegetation barriers. To account for the physical mechanisms, by which the vegetation barrier deposits and disperses pollutants, we propose a multi-region approach that describes the parameters of the standard Gaussian equations in each region. The four regions include the vegetation, a downwind wake, a transition, and a recovery zone. For each region, we fit the relevant Gaussian plume equation parameters as a function of the vegetation properties and the local wind speed. Furthermore, the model captures particle deposition which is a major factor in pollutant reduction by vegetation barriers. We generated data from 75 (CFD)-based simulations, using the Comprehensive Turbulent Aerosol Dynamics and Gas Chemistry (CTAG) model, to parameterize the Gaussian-based equations. The simulations used reflected a wide range of vegetation barriers, with heights from 2-10 m, and various densities, represented by leaf area index values from 4-11, and evaluated under different urban conditions, represented by wind speeds from 1-5 m/s. The CTAG model has been evaluated against two field measurements to ensure that it can properly represent the vegetation barrier’s pollutant deposition and dispersion. The proposed multi-region Gaussian-based model was evaluated across 9 particle sizes and a tracer gas to assess its capability of capturing deposition. The multi-region model’s normalized mean error (NME) ranged between 0.18-0.3, the fractional bias (FB) ranged between -0.12-0.09, and R2 value ranged from 0.47-0.75 across all particle sizes and the tracer gas for ground level concentrations, which are within acceptable range. Even though the multi-region model is parameterized for coniferous trees, our sensitivity study indicates that the parameterized Gaussian-based model can provide useful predictions for hedge/bushes vegetative barriers as well." ADDITIONAL DESCRIPTION: Detailed variable relationships are described in the source document. The VRD associated with the ESML entry provides variables in a simplified form. |
|
Specific Policy or Decision Context Cited
em.detail.policyDecisionContextHelp
?
|
Strategic habitat conservation by USFW for Wetland Conservation Act funding | Land management, ecosystem management, response to EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy | Not applicable | None reported | None identified |
|
Biophysical Context
|
Boreal Hardwood Transition, Eastern Tallgrass Prairie, Prairie Hardwood Transition, Central Hardwoods | Northern Spain; Bizkaia region | nearshore; <1.5 km offshore; <12 m depth | Conservation Reserve Program lands left to go fallow | Communities living and working in near-road environments |
|
EM Scenario Drivers
em.detail.scenarioDriverHelp
?
|
Conservation efforts for: marsh-wetland breeding birds, regional marsh and open-water for non-breeding birds, mudflat/shallows for birds during non-breeding period. | No scenarios presented | Not applicable | N/A | None scenarios presented |
EM Relationship to Other EMs or Applications
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
Method Only, Application of Method or Model Run
em.detail.methodOrAppHelp
?
|
Method + Application | Method + Application | Method + Application | Method + Application | Method Only |
|
New or Pre-existing EM?
em.detail.newOrExistHelp
?
|
New or revised model | New or revised model | New or revised model | New or revised model | New or revised model |
Related EMs (for example, other versions or derivations of this EM) described in ESML
em.detail.relatedEmHelp
?
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
Document ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmDocumentIdHelp
?
|
Doc-169 | Doc-170 | Doc-171 | Doc-172 | Doc-173 | Doc-174 | Doc-175 | None | None | Doc-405 | None |
|
EM ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmEmIdHelp
?
|
None | None | None | EM-831 | EM-838 | EM-839 | EM-840 | EM-841 | EM-842 | EM-843 | EM-844 | EM-846 | EM-847 | None |
EM Modeling Approach
EM Relationship to Time
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
EM Temporal Extent
em.detail.tempExtentHelp
?
|
2007 | 2000 - 2007 | 2006-2007 | 2008 | Not applicable |
|
EM Time Dependence
em.detail.timeDependencyHelp
?
|
time-stationary | time-stationary | time-stationary | time-stationary | Not applicable |
|
EM Time Reference (Future/Past)
em.detail.futurePastHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable |
|
EM Time Continuity
em.detail.continueDiscreteHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Value
em.detail.tempGrainSizeHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Unit
em.detail.tempGrainSizeUnitHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable |
EM Spatial Extent
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
Bounding Type
em.detail.boundingTypeHelp
?
|
Physiographic or ecological | Geopolitical | Physiographic or Ecological | Physiographic or ecological | Not applicable |
|
Spatial Extent Name
em.detail.extentNameHelp
?
|
Upper Mississippi River and Great Lakes Region | Bilbao Metropolitan Greenbelt | St.Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands | Piedmont Ecoregion | Not applicable |
|
Spatial Extent Area (Magnitude)
em.detail.extentAreaHelp
?
|
>1,000,000 km^2 | 100-1000 km^2 | 10-100 km^2 | 100,000-1,000,000 km^2 | Not applicable |
Spatial Distribution of Computations
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
EM Spatial Distribution
em.detail.distributeLumpHelp
?
|
spatially distributed (in at least some cases) | spatially distributed (in at least some cases) | spatially lumped (in all cases) | spatially lumped (in all cases) | spatially distributed (in at least some cases) |
|
Spatial Grain Type
em.detail.spGrainTypeHelp
?
|
area, for pixel or radial feature | area, for pixel or radial feature | Not applicable | Not applicable | length, for linear feature (e.g., stream mile) |
|
Spatial Grain Size
em.detail.spGrainSizeHelp
?
|
1 ha | 2 m x 2 m | Not applicable | Not applicable | user defined |
EM Structure and Computation Approach
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
EM Computational Approach
em.detail.emComputationalApproachHelp
?
|
Analytic | Analytic | Analytic | Analytic | Analytic |
|
EM Determinism
em.detail.deterStochHelp
?
|
deterministic | deterministic | deterministic | deterministic | stochastic |
|
Statistical Estimation of EM
em.detail.statisticalEstimationHelp
?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Model Checking Procedures Used
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
Model Calibration Reported?
em.detail.calibrationHelp
?
|
No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
|
Model Goodness of Fit Reported?
em.detail.goodnessFitHelp
?
|
No | No | Yes | No | Not applicable |
|
Goodness of Fit (metric| value | unit)
em.detail.goodnessFitValuesHelp
?
|
None | None |
|
None | None |
|
Model Operational Validation Reported?
em.detail.validationHelp
?
|
No | Yes | No | No | Not applicable |
|
Model Uncertainty Analysis Reported?
em.detail.uncertaintyAnalysisHelp
?
|
No | No | Yes | No | Not applicable |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Reported?
em.detail.sensAnalysisHelp
?
|
No | No | No | Yes | Not applicable |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Include Interactions?
em.detail.interactionConsiderHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Unclear | Not applicable |
EM Locations, Environments, Ecology
Location of EM Application
Terrestrial location (Classification hierarchy: Continent > Country > U.S. State [United States only])
em.detail.relationToSpaceTerrestrialHelp
?
| EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
|
None |
|
None |
Marine location (Classification hierarchy: Realm > Region > Province > Ecoregion)
em.detail.relationToSpaceMarineHelp
?
| EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
| None | None |
|
None | None |
Centroid Lat/Long (Decimal Degree)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
Centroid Latitude
em.detail.ddLatHelp
?
|
42.05 | 43.25 | 17.75 | 36.23 | Not applicable |
|
Centroid Longitude
em.detail.ddLongHelp
?
|
-88.6 | -2.92 | -64.75 | -81.9 | Not applicable |
|
Centroid Datum
em.detail.datumHelp
?
|
WGS84 | WGS84 | NAD83 | WGS84 | Not applicable |
|
Centroid Coordinates Status
em.detail.coordinateStatusHelp
?
|
Estimated | Provided | Estimated | Estimated | Not applicable |
Environments and Scales Modeled
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
EM Environmental Sub-Class
em.detail.emEnvironmentalSubclassHelp
?
|
Inland Wetlands | Aquatic Environment (sub-classes not fully specified) | Rivers and Streams | Near Coastal Marine and Estuarine | Terrestrial Environment (sub-classes not fully specified) | Forests | Agroecosystems | Created Greenspace | Grasslands | Scrubland/Shrubland | Near Coastal Marine and Estuarine | Grasslands | Terrestrial Environment (sub-classes not fully specified) |
|
Specific Environment Type
em.detail.specificEnvTypeHelp
?
|
Not reported | none | stony coral reef | grasslands | Communities living and working in near-road environments |
|
EM Ecological Scale
em.detail.ecoScaleHelp
?
|
Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale corresponds to the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class |
Scale and taxa of organisms modeled
Scale of differentiation of organisms modeled
em.detail.nameOfOrgsOrGroupsHelp
?
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
EM Organismal Scale
em.detail.orgScaleHelp
?
|
Species | Not applicable | Guild or Assemblage | Species | Not applicable |
Taxonomic level and name of organisms or groups identified
taxonomyHelp
?
| EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
None Available |
|
|
None Available |
EnviroAtlas URL
EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system
CICES v 4.3 - Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (Section > Division > Group > Class)
em.detail.cicesHelp
?
| EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
|
|
|
|
<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/national-ecosystem-services-classification-system-nescs-plus">National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS) Plus</a>
fegs1Help
?
(Environmental Subclass > Ecological End-Product (EEP) > EEP Subclass > EEP Modifier)
fegs2Help
?
| EM-113 | EM-193 | EM-260 | EM-845 | EM-942 |
|
|
|
|
None |