Aim To assess the usefulness of combining climate predictors with additional types of environmental predictors in species distribution models for rangerestricted species, using common correlative species distribution modelling approaches.Location Florida, USA Methods We used five different algorithms to create distribution models for 14 vertebrate species, using seven different predictor sets: two with bioclimate predictors only, and five 'combination' models using bioclimate predictors plus 'additional' predictors from groups representing: human influence, land cover, extreme weather or noise (spatially random data).We use a linear mixed-model approach to analyse the effects of predictor set and algorithm on model accuracy, variable importance scores and spatial predictions.Results Regardless of modelling algorithm, no one predictor set produced significantly more accurate models than all others, though models including human influence predictors were the only ones with significantly higher accuracy than climate-only models. Climate predictors had consistently higher variable importance scores than additional predictors in combination models, though there was variation related to predictor type and algorithm. While spatial predictions varied moderately between predictor sets, discrepancies were significantly greater between modelling algorithms than between predictor sets. Furthermore, there were no differences in the level of agreement between binary 'presence-absence' maps and independent species range maps related to the predictor set used. Main conclusionsOur results indicate that additional predictors have relatively minor effects on the accuracy of climate-based species distribution models and minor to moderate effects on spatial predictions. We suggest that implementing species distribution models with only climate predictors may provide an effective and efficient approach for initial assessments of environmental suitability.

No abstract

a b s t r a c tClimate envelope models are widely used to forecast potential effects of climate change on species distributions. A key issue in climate envelope modeling is the selection of predictor variables that most directly influence species. To determine whether model performance and spatial predictions were related to the selection of predictor variables, we compared models using bioclimate variables with models constructed from monthly climate data for twelve terrestrial vertebrate species in the southeastern USA using two different algorithms (random forests or generalized linear models), and two model selection techniques (using uncorrelated predictors or a subset of user-defined biologically relevant predictor variables). There were no differences in performance between models created with bioclimate or monthly variables, but one metric of model performance was significantly greater using the random forest algorithm compared with generalized linear models. Spatial predictions between maps using bioclimate and monthly variables were very consistent using the random forest algorithm with uncorrelated predictors, whereas we observed greater variability in predictions using generalized linear models.