Corrigendum to "Comparing the performance of global, geographically weighted and ecologically weighted species distribution models for Scottish wildcats using GLM and Random Forest predictive modeling"

In our recently published paper, “Comparing the performance of global, geographically weighted and ecologically weighted species distribution models for Scottish wildcats using GLM and Random Forest predictive modeling” there was an error in the submitted final version of the manuscript. Specifically, in the published manuscript text that was taken from the reply to reviewers letter was pasted into the Discussion section. This was done in a preliminary draft of the final paper to mark points in the Discussion section to edit and improve. These final edits were then done, but then by mistake the initial version containing the raw responses to the reviewers was uploaded and subsequently published. Here we wish to provide additional text that should have been in the section instead of the response to reviewers text.
This series of papers on the ecological nonstationarity of Scottish Wildcat habitat models provides the context and examples to elucidate several key ideas and conjectures discussed by Cushman (2010), who asked if spatial and temporal complexity in ecological systems is merely noise around the predictions of non-spatial, equilibrium processes? And do spatial and temporal variability in the environment and autogenic space–time processes in populations fundamentally alter system behavior such that ideal models of nonspatial and equilibrium processes do not represent the fundamental dynamics of ecological systems? He proposed that temporal and spatial dynamics of the environment, autogenic population processes, and their interactions, may create a spatially dynamic, non-equilibrium reality where the predictions of idealized, global, stationary and context independent models are seldom if ever met.