Combining static and dynamic variables in species distribution models under climate change

被引:155
|
作者
Stanton, Jessica C. [1 ]
Pearson, Richard G. [2 ,3 ]
Horning, Ned [2 ]
Ersts, Peter [2 ]
Akcakaya, H. Resit [1 ]
机构
[1] SUNY Stony Brook, Dept Ecol & Evolut, Stony Brook, NY 11794 USA
[2] Amer Museum Nat Hist, Ctr Biodivers & Conservat, New York, NY 10024 USA
[3] Amer Museum Nat Hist, Dept Herpetol, New York, NY 10024 USA
来源
METHODS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION | 2012年 / 3卷 / 02期
基金
美国国家航空航天局;
关键词
bioclimate; land use; maxent; niche model; SDM; soil; SPATIALLY EXPLICIT; POPULATION-MODELS; PREDICTORS; BIOCLIMATE; DATABASE; IMPACTS; AREA;
D O I
10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011.00157.x
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
1. Methods used to predict shifts in species ranges because of climate change commonly involve species distribution (niche) modelling using climatic variables, future values of which are predicted for the next several decades by general circulation models. However, species distributions also depend on factors other than climate, such as land cover, land use and soil type. Changes in some of these factors, such as soil type, occur over geologic time and are thus imperceptible over the timescale of these types of projections. Other factors, such as land use and land cover, are expected to change over shorter timescales, but reliable projections are not available. Some important predictor variables, therefore, must be treated as unchanging, or static, whether because of the properties of the variable or out of necessity. The question of how best to combine dynamic variables predicted by climate models with static variables is not trivial and has been dealt with differently in studies to date. Alternative methods include using the static variables as masks, including them as independent explanatory variables in the model, or excluding them altogether. 2. Using a set of simulated species, we tested various methods for combining static variables with future climate scenarios. Our results showed that including static variables in the model with the dynamic variables performed better or no worse than either masking or excluding the static variables. 3. The difference in predictive ability was most pronounced when there is an interaction between the static and dynamic variables. 4. For variables such as land use, our results indicate that if such variables affect species distributions, including them in the model is better than excluding them, even though this may mean making the unrealistic assumption that the variable will not change in the future. 5. These results demonstrate the importance of including static and dynamic non-climate variables in addition to climate variables in species distribution models designed to predict future change in a species' habitat or distribution as a result of climate change.
引用
收藏
页码:349 / 357
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Combining conservation status and species distribution models for planning assisted colonisation under climate change
    Casazza, Gabriele
    Abeli, Thomas
    Bacchetta, Gianluigi
    Dagnino, Davide
    Fenu, Giuseppe
    Gargano, Domenico
    Minuto, Luigi
    Montagnani, Chiara
    Orsenigo, Simone
    Peruzzi, Lorenzo
    Varaldo, Lucia
    Rossi, Graziano
    JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY, 2021, 109 (06) : 2284 - 2295
  • [2] A climate of uncertainty: accounting for error in climate variables for species distribution models
    Stoklosa, Jakub
    Daly, Christopher
    Foster, Scott D.
    Ashcroft, Michael B.
    Warton, David I.
    METHODS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2015, 6 (04): : 412 - 423
  • [3] Combining state-and-transition simulations and species distribution models to anticipate the effects of climate change
    Miller, Brian W.
    Frid, Leonardo
    Chang, Tony
    Piekielek, Nathan
    Hansen, Andrew J.
    Morisette, Jeffrey T.
    AIMS ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, 2015, 2 (02) : 400 - 426
  • [4] Risk map for the range expansion of Thrips palmi in Korea under climate change: Combining species distribution models with land-use change
    Hong, Jinsol
    Lee, Gwan-Seok
    Park, Jung-Joon
    Mo, Hyoung-ho
    Cho, Kijong
    JOURNAL OF ASIA-PACIFIC ENTOMOLOGY, 2019, 22 (03) : 666 - 674
  • [5] Scale effects in species distribution models: implications for conservation planning under climate change
    Seo, Changwan
    Thorne, James H.
    Hannah, Lee
    Thuiller, Wilfried
    BIOLOGY LETTERS, 2009, 5 (01) : 39 - 43
  • [6] Improving the Use of Species Distribution Models in Conservation Planning and Management under Climate Change
    Porfirio, Luciana L.
    Harris, Rebecca M. B.
    Lefroy, Edward C.
    Hugh, Sonia
    Gould, Susan F.
    Lee, Greg
    Bindoff, Nathaniel L.
    Mackey, Brendan
    PLOS ONE, 2014, 9 (11):
  • [7] Correlative and mechanistic models of species distribution provide congruent forecasts under climate change
    Kearney, Michael R.
    Wintle, Brendan A.
    Porter, Warren P.
    CONSERVATION LETTERS, 2010, 3 (03): : 203 - 213
  • [8] The role of demography, intra-species variation, and species distribution models in species' projections under climate change
    Swab, Rebecca M.
    Regan, Helen M.
    Matthies, Diethart
    Becker, Ute
    Bruun, Hans Henrik
    ECOGRAPHY, 2015, 38 (03) : 221 - 230
  • [9] Stacked species distribution models and macroecological models provide congruent projections of avian species richness under climate change
    Distler, Trisha
    Schuetz, Justin G.
    Velasquez-Tibata, Jorge
    Langham, Gary M.
    JOURNAL OF BIOGEOGRAPHY, 2015, 42 (05) : 976 - 988
  • [10] Evaluating the productivity of four main tree species in Germany under climate change with static reduced models
    Gutsch, Martin
    Lasch-Born, Petra
    Suckow, Felicitas
    Reyer, Christopher P. O.
    ANNALS OF FOREST SCIENCE, 2016, 73 (02) : 401 - 410