Statistical species distribution models (SDMs) are widely used to predict the potential changes in species distributions under climate change scenarios. We suggest that we need to revisit the conceptual framework and ecological assumptions on which the relationship between species distributions and environment is based. We present a simple conceptual framework to examine the selection of environmental predictors and data resolution scales. These vary widely in recent papers, with light inconsistently included in the models. Focusing on light as a necessary component of plant SDMs, we briefly review its dependence on aspect and slope and existing knowledge of its influence on plant distribution. Differences in light regimes between north‐ and south‐facing aspects in temperate latitudes can produce differences in temperature equivalent to moves 200 km polewards. Local topography may create refugia that are not recognized in many climate change SDMs using coarse‐scale data. We argue that current assumptions about the selection of predictors and data resolution need further testing. Application of these ideas can clarify many issues of scale, extent and choice of predictors, and potentially improve the use of SDMs for climate change modelling of biodiversity.
Aim We consider three questions. (1) How different are the predicted distribution maps when climate-only and climate-plus-terrain models are developed from highresolution data? (2) What are the implications of differences between the models when predicting future distributions under climate change scenarios, particularly for climate-only models at coarse resolution? (3) Does the use of high-resolution data and climate-plus-terrain models predict an increase in the number of local refugia?Location South-eastern New South Wales, Australia.Methods We developed two species distribution models for Eucalyptus fastigata under current climate conditions using generalized additive modelling. One used only climate variables as predictors (mean annual temperature, mean annual rainfall, mean summer rainfall); the other used both climate and landscape (June daily radiation, topographic position, lithology, nutrients) variables as predictors. Predictions of the distribution under current climate and climate change were then made for both models at a pixel resolution of 100 m. ResultsThe model using climate and landscape variables as predictors explained a significantly greater proportion of the deviance than the climate-only model. Inclusion of landscape variables resulted in the prediction of much larger areas of existing optimal habitat. An overlay of predicted future climate on the current climate space indicated that extrapolation of the statistical models was not occurring and models were therefore more robust. Under climate change, landscape-defined refugia persisted in areas where the climate-only model predicted major declines. In areas where expansion was predicted, the increase in optimal habitat was always greater with landscape predictors. Recognition of extensive optimal habitat conditions and potential refugia was dependent on the use of high-resolution landscape data.Main conclusions Using only climate variables as predictors for assessing species responses to climate change ignores the accepted conceptual model of plant species distribution. Explicit statements justifying the selection of predictors based on ecological principles are needed. Models using only climate variables overestimate range reduction under climate change and fail to predict potential refugia. Fine-scale-resolution data are required to capture important climate/ landscape interactions. Extrapolation of statistical models to regions in climate space outside the region where they were fitted is risky.
Identification of refugia is an increasingly important adaptation strategy in conservation planning under rapid anthropogenic climate change. Granite outcrops (GOs) provide extraordinary diversity, including a wide range of taxa, vegetation types and habitats in the Southwest Australian Floristic Region (SWAFR). However, poor characterization of GOs limits the capacity of conservation planning for refugia under climate change. A novel means for the rapid identification of potential refugia is presented, based on the assessment of local-scale environment and vegetation structure in a wider region. This approach was tested on GOs across the SWAFR. Airborne discrete return Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) data and Red Green and Blue (RGB) imagery were acquired. Vertical vegetation profiles were used to derive 54 structural classes. Structural vegetation types were described in three areas for supervised classification of a further 13 GOs across the region. Habitat descriptions based on 494 vegetation plots on and around these GOs were used to quantify relationships between environmental variables, ground cover and canopy height. The vegetation surrounding GOs is strongly related to structural vegetation types (Kappa = 0.8) and to its spatial context. Water gaining sites around GOs are characterized by taller and denser vegetation in all areas. The strong relationship between rainfall, soil-depth, and vegetation structure (R2 of 0.8–0.9) allowed comparisons of vegetation structure between current and future climate. Significant shifts in vegetation structural types were predicted and mapped for future climates. Water gaining areas below granite outcrops were identified as important putative refugia. A reduction in rainfall may be offset by the occurrence of deeper soil elsewhere on the outcrop. However, climate change interactions with fire and water table declines may render our conclusions conservative. The LiDAR-based mapping approach presented enables the integration of site-based biotic assessment with structural vegetation types for the rapid delineation and prioritization of key refugia.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.