in our project we want to compare the outputs (pollinator supply) of different model runs. Only the input raster changes, as we changed the land use for the same landscape, everything else remains unchanged. So, our question is, if the pollinator supply index is comparable for different landscapes, which is, if it is not scaled on maximum/minimum values, are we right? Or can the index only be interpreted within one output, as the values are only relative to each other in one model run?
I hope, you understand my question - please ask, if I can clarify something!
Many thanks to all that can help!!!
Maybe this comment from the User Guide will help clear things up.
As an index-based model, it is well-suited for making qualitative comparisons among scenarios representing marginal changes in LULC, farm management practices or crop types. On-farm pollinator abundance PAF(x,j) will be affected by the number of pollinator guilds being modeled and so cannot be used to compare different pollinator communities even on the same landscape. Similarly, because relative species abundance indices sa(s) are specified as an input, the model will not yield accurate results for scenarios in which a rare species becomes common or vice versa due to large changes in nesting habitat or floral resource availability.
To me it sounds like, yes, comparing LULC scenarios is something this model allows but that the on-farm pollinator abundance might be an exception and not comparable…