Probabilistic Neural Networks (PNNs) and Support Vector Machines (SVMs) are flexible classification techniques suited to render trustworthy species distribution and habitat suitability models. Although several alternatives to improve PNNs' reliability and performance and/or to reduce computational costs exist, PNNs are currently not well recognised as SVMs because the SVMs were compared with standard PNNs. To rule out this idea, the microhabitat suitability for the Eastern Iberian chub (Squalius valentinus Doadrio & Carmona, 2006) was modelled with SVMs and four types of PNNs (homoscedastic, heteroscedastic, cluster and enhanced PNNs); all of them optimised with differential evolution. The fitness function and several performance criteria (correctly classified instances, true skill statistic, specificity and sensitivity) and partial dependence plots were used to assess respectively the performance and reliability of each habitat suitability model. Heteroscedastic and enhanced PNNs achieved the highest performance in every index but specificity. However, these two PNNs rendered ecologically unreliable partial dependence plots. Conversely, homoscedastic and cluster PNNs rendered ecologically reliable partial dependence plots. Thus, Eastern Iberian chub proved to be a eurytopic species, presenting the highest suitability in microhabitats with cover present, low flow velocity (approx. 0.3 m/s), intermediate depth (approx. 0.6 m) and fine gravel (64-256 mm). PNNs outperformed SVMs; thus, based on the results of the cluster PNN, which also showed high values of the performance criteria, we would advocate a combination of approaches (e.g., cluster & heteroscedastic or cluster & enhanced PNNs) to balance the trade-off between accuracy and reliability of habitat suitability models. 1 Introduction Humans have facilitated species extinctions, invasions, increased soil erosion, altered fire frequency and hydrology, and incited profound changes in primary productivity and other key biogeochemical and ecosystems processes (Ellis et al., 2010). Therefore, in the face of this global change, forecasting future ecosystem states, such as future species geographic distributions or land-use patterns, is currently a central priority in biogeographical and ecological sciences (Eberenz et al., 2016; Evans et al., 2016). As a consequence of this priority, scientists, conservationists and managers are repeatedly compelled to confront new problems requiring data analysis (LaDeau et al., 2016). Data analysis is largely classified into two broad categories: unsupervised and supervised (Olden et al., 2008). The former focus on revealing patterns and structures in data (e.g., finding groups of co-occurring species), such as the renowned Self-Organising Maps (SOM) (Kohonen, 1982) or the laureate t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbour Embedding (t-SNE) (Van Der Maaten and Hinton, 2008). Conversely, supervised approaches, such as decision trees (e.g., CART; Breiman et al., 1984) or the Generalised Additive Models (GAMs) (Hastie and Tibshirani, 1990),...