Fig 1.
The extent of the second iteration habitat suitability model for lesser prairie-chicken leks across the five states of its current range, overlaid with the species’ Estimated Occupied Range (EOR) area, buffered by 16.1 km, and shaded by ecoregion. Second iteration study extent added the new counties to the initial iteration extent. [Projected Coordinate System: Albers Conic Equal Area].
Table 1.
Methods and sources used to create predictor variables used to model lesser prairie-chicken lek suitability.
Fig 2.
Lek suitability model predictions by threshold and predictor set.
Lesser prairie-chicken lek suitability model predictions without state boundary as a predictor (a, c) and including state boundary as a predictor (b, d) displayed as (a-b) the three different suitability thresholds used to classify the models into suitable and unsuitable habitat including minimum training presence (MTP), 5th percentile, and 10th percentile and (c-d) the continuous habitat suitability index, displayed using a minimum maximum stretch method. [Projected Coordinate System: Albers Conic Equal Area].
Fig 3.
Comparison of area predicted suitable by threshold, predictor set, state, study extent, and ecoregion.
Lesser prairie-chicken lek suitable habitat predictions for different thresholds (columns) including minimum training presence (MTP), 5th percentile, and 10th percentile and different region types (rows) including state, buffered estimated occupied range (EOR+10), and ecoregion. Bars are grouped by the model (with or without state included as a predictor) and iteration (first or second version).
Table 2.
Metrics comparing area of suitable habitat modeled with and without state as a predictor.
Table 3.
Changes in area of land cover categories by study area, state, and ecoregion and state between first and second iteration modeling for lesser prairie chickens.