Biodiversity conservation adaptation to climate change: Protecting the actors or the stage

被引:5
|
作者
Zhu, Gengping [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Giam, Xingli [2 ]
Armsworth, Paul R. [2 ]
Cho, Seong-Hoon [3 ]
Papes, Monica [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tennessee, Natl Inst Math & Biol Synth, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA
[2] Univ Tennessee, Dept Ecol & Evolutionary Biol, Knoxville, TN USA
[3] Univ Tennessee, Dept Agr & Resource Econ, Knoxville, TN USA
[4] Washington State Univ, Pullman, WA 99163 USA
关键词
Appalachians; ecological niche model; geodiversity; hotspot; refugia; resilience; species distribution model; LAND FACETS; GEODIVERSITY; IMPACTS; MODELS; NICHE; TIME;
D O I
10.1002/eap.2765
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
To be able to protect biodiversity in coming decades, conservation strategies need to consider what sites will be important for species not just today but also in the future. Different methods have been proposed to identify places that will be important for species in the future. Two of the most frequently used methods, ecological niche modeling and climate resilience, have distinct aims. The former focuses on identifying the suitable environmental conditions for species, thus protecting the "actor, " namely, the species, whereas the latter seeks to safeguard the "stage, " or the landscape in which species occur. We used the two methods to identify climate refugia for 258 forest vertebrates under short- and long-term climatic changes in a biodiversity hotspot, the Appalachian ecoregion of the United States. We also evaluated the spatial congruence of the two approaches for a possible conservation application, that of protecting 30% of the Appalachian region, in line with recent national and international policy recommendations. We detected weak positive correlations between resilience scores and baseline vertebrate richness, estimated with ecological niche models for historical (baseline) climatic conditions. The correlations were stronger for amphibians and mammals than for birds and reptiles. Under climate change scenarios, the correlations between estimated vertebrate richness and resilience were also weakly positive; a positive correlation was detected only for amphibians. Locations with estimated future gain of suitable climatic conditions for vertebrates showed low correlation with resilience. Overall, our results indicate that climate resilience and ecological niche modeling approaches capture different characteristics of projected distributional changes of Appalachian vertebrates. A climate resilience (the stage) approach could be more effective in safeguarding species with low dispersal abilities, whereas an ecological niche modeling (the actor) approach could be more suitable for species with long-distance dispersal capacity because they may be more broadly impacted by climate and less sensitive to geophysical features captured by a climate resilience approach.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Redesigning biodiversity conservation projects for climate change: examples from the field
    Karen A. Poiani
    Rebecca L. Goldman
    Jennifer Hobson
    Jonathan M. Hoekstra
    Kara S. Nelson
    Biodiversity and Conservation, 2011, 20 : 185 - 201
  • [22] Achieving conservation targets by jointly addressing climate change and biodiversity loss
    Suraci, Justin P.
    Farwell, Laura S.
    Littlefield, Caitlin E.
    Freeman, Patrick T.
    Zachmann, Luke J.
    Landau, Vincent A.
    Anderson, Jesse J.
    Dickson, Brett G.
    ECOSPHERE, 2023, 14 (04):
  • [23] A macroecological approach to evolutionary rescue and adaptation to climate change
    Diniz-Filho, Jose Alexandre F.
    Souza, Kelly S.
    Bini, Luis M.
    Loyola, Rafael
    Dobrovolski, Ricardo
    Rodrigues, Joao Fabricio M.
    Lima-Ribeiro, Matheus de S.
    Terribile, Levi C.
    Rangel, Thiago F.
    Bione, Igor
    Freitas, Roniel
    Machado, Ibere F.
    Rocha, Taina
    Lorini, Maria L.
    Vale, Mariana M.
    Navas, Carlos A.
    Maciel, Natan M.
    Villalobos, Fabricio
    Olalla-Tarraga, Miguel A.
    Gouveia, Sidney
    ECOGRAPHY, 2019, 42 (06) : 1124 - 1141
  • [24] Coupled Networks of Permanent Protected Areas and Dynamic Conservation Areas for Biodiversity Conservation Under Climate Change
    D'Aloia, Cassidy C.
    Naujokaitis-Lewis, Ilona
    Blackford, Christopher
    Chu, Cindy
    Curtis, Janelle M. R.
    Darling, Emily
    Guichard, Frederic
    Leroux, Shawn J.
    Martensen, Alexandre C.
    Rayfield, Bronwyn
    Sunday, Jennifer M.
    Xuereb, Amanda
    Fortin, Marie-Josee
    FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2019, 7
  • [25] Addressing potential local adaptation in species distribution models: implications for conservation under climate change
    Hallfors, Maria Helena
    Liao, Jishan
    Dzurisin, Jason
    Grundel, Ralph
    Hyvarinen, Marko
    Towle, Kevin
    Wu, Grace C.
    Hellmann, Jessica J.
    ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 2016, 26 (04) : 1154 - 1169
  • [26] Conservation management approaches to protecting the capacity for corals to respond to climate change: a theoretical comparison
    Baskett, Marissa L.
    Nisbet, Roger M.
    Kappel, Carrie V.
    Mumby, Peter J.
    Gaines, Steven D.
    GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 2010, 16 (04) : 1229 - 1246
  • [27] Climate change and California's terrestrial biodiversity
    Harrison, Susan
    Franklin, Janet
    Hernandez, Rebecca R.
    Ikegami, Makihiko
    Safford, Hugh D.
    Thorne, James H.
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2024, 121 (32)
  • [28] The Climate Change and Marine Biodiversity
    Yazdi, Soheila Khoshnevis
    Shakouri, Bahram
    BIOLOGY, ENVIRONMENT AND CHEMISTRY, 2011, : 257 - 261
  • [29] Shifting ranges and conservation challenges for lemurs in the face of climate change
    Brown, Jason L.
    Yoder, Anne D.
    ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2015, 5 (06): : 1131 - 1142
  • [30] Vulnerabilities and adaptation of ports to climate change
    Nursey-Bray, Melissa
    Blackwell, Boyd
    Brooks, Ben
    Campbell, Marnie L.
    Goldsworthy, Laurie
    Pateman, Hilary
    Rodrigues, Ian
    Roome, Melanie
    Wright, Jeffrey T.
    Francis, John
    Hewitt, Chad L.
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2013, 56 (07) : 1021 - 1045