Information on where species occur is an important component of conservation and management decisions, but knowledge of distributions is often coarse or incomplete. Species distribution models provide a tool for mapping habitat and can produce credible, defensible, and repeatable information with which to inform decisions. However, these models are sensitive to data inputs and methodological choices, making it important to assess the reliability and utility of model predictions. We provide a rubric that model developers can use to communicate a model's attributes and its appropriate uses. We emphasize the importance of tailoring model development and delivery to the species of interest and the intended use and the advantages of iterative modeling and validation. We highlight how species distribution models have been used to design surveys for new populations, inform spatial prioritization decisions for management actions, and support regulatory decision-making and compliance, tying these examples back to our model assessment rubric.

Observed ecological responses to climate change are highly individualistic across species and locations, and understanding the drivers of this variability is essential for management and conservation efforts. While it is clear that differences in exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity all contribute to heterogeneity in climate change vulnerability, predicting these features at macroecological scales remains a critical challenge. We explore multiple drivers of heterogeneous vulnerability across the distributions of 96 vegetation types of the ecologically diverse western US, using data on observed climate trends from 1948 to 2014 to highlight emerging patterns of change. We ask three novel questions about factors potentially shaping vulnerability across the region: (a) How does sensitivity to different climate variables vary geographically and across vegetation classes? (b) How do multivariate climate exposure patterns interact with these sensitivities to shape vulnerability patterns? (c) How different are these vulnerability patterns according to three widely implemented vulnerability paradigms-niche novelty (decline in modeled suitability), temporal novelty (standardized anomaly), and spatial novelty (inbound climate velocity)-each of which uses a distinct frame of reference to quantify climate departure? We propose that considering these three novelty paradigms in combination could help improve our understanding and prediction of heterogeneous climate change responses, and we discuss the distinct climate adaptation strategies connected with different combinations of high and low novelty across the three metrics. Our results reveal a diverse mosaic of climate change vulnerability signatures across the region's plant communities. Each of the above factors contributes strongly to this heterogeneity: climate variable sensitivity exhibits clear patterns across vegetation types, multivariate climate change data reveal highly diverse exposure signatures across locations, and the three novelty paradigms diverge widely in their climate change vulnerability predictions. Together, these results shed light on potential drivers of individualistic climate change responses and may help to inform effective management strategies. K E Y W O R D S biogeography, climate change, climate departure, climate velocity, niche model, novel climate, resource management, vegetation, vulnerability

Increasing attention to pollinators and their role in providing ecosystem services has revealed a paucity of studies on long-term population trends of most insect pollinators in many parts of the world. Because targeted monitoring programs are resource intensive and unlikely to be performed on most insect pollinators, we took advantage of existing collection records to examine long-term trends in northeastern United States populations of 26 species of hawk moths (family Sphingidae) that are presumed to be pollinators. We compiled over 6,600 records from nine museum and 14 private collections that spanned a 112-year period, and used logistic generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) to examine long-term population trends. We controlled for uneven sampling effort by adding a covariate for list length, the number of species recorded during each sampling event. We found that of the 22 species for which there was sufficient data to assess population trends, eight species declined and four species increased in detection probability (the probability of a species being recorded during each year while accounting for effort, climate, and spatial effects in the GLMMs). Of the four species with too few records to statistically assess, two have disappeared from parts of their ranges. None of the four species with diurnal adults showed a trend in detection probability. Two species that are pests of solanaceous crops declined, consistent with a seven-fold drop in the area planted in tobacco and tomato crops. We found some evidence linking susceptibility to parasitoidism by the introduced fly Compsilura concinnata (Tachinidae) to declines. Moths with larvae that feed on vines and trees, where available evidence indicates that the fly is most likely to attack, had a greater propensity to decline than species that use herbs and shrubs as larval host plants. Species that develop in the spring, before Compsilura populations have increased, did not decline. However, restricting the analysis to hawk moth records from areas outside of a “refuge” area where Compsilura does not occur did not significantly increase the intensity of the declines as would be predicted if Compsilura was the primary cause of declines. Forests have recovered over the study period across most of the northeastern U.S., but this does not appear to have been a major factor because host plants of several of the declining species have increased in abundance with forest expansion and maturation. Climate variables used in the GLMMs were not consistently related to moth detection probability. Hawk moth declines may have ecological effects on both the plants pollinated by these species and vertebrate predators of the moths.

We applied a framework to assess climate change vulnerability of 52 major vegetation types in the Western United States to provide a spatially explicit input to adaptive management decisions. The framework addressed climate exposure and ecosystem resilience; the latter derived from analyses of ecosystem sensitivity and adaptive capacity. Measures of climate change exposure used observed climate change (1981–2014) and then climate projections for the mid-21st century (2040–2069 RCP 4.5). Measures of resilience included (under ecosystem sensitivity) landscape intactness, invasive species, fire regime alteration, and forest insect and disease risk, and (under adaptive capacity), measures for topo-climate variability, diversity within functional species groups, and vulnerability of any keystone species. Outputs are generated per 100 km2 hexagonal area for each type. As of 2014, moderate climate change vulnerability was indicated for >50% of the area of 50 of 52 types. By the mid-21st century, all but 19 types face high or very high vulnerability with >50% of the area scoring in these categories. Measures for resilience explain most components of vulnerability as of 2014, with most targeted vegetation scoring low in adaptive capacity measures and variably for specific sensitivity measures. Elevated climate exposure explains increases in vulnerability between the current and mid-century time periods.

We applied a framework to assess climate change vulnerability of 52 major vegetation types in the western United States to provide spatially-explicit input to adaptive management decisions. The framework addressed climate exposure and ecosystem resilience; the latter derived from analyses of ecosystem sensitivity and adaptive capacity. Measures of climate change exposure used observed climate change (1981-2014) and then climate projections for the mid-21st century (2040-2069 RCP 4.5). Measures of resilience included (under ecosystem sensitivity) landscape intactness, invasive species, fire regime alteration, and forest insect & disease risk, and (under adaptive capacity), measures for topo-climate variability, diversity with functional species groups, and vulnerability of any keystone species. Outputs are generated per 100km2 hexagonal area for each type. As of 2014, moderate climate change vulnerability was indicated for >50% of the area of 50 of 52 types. By the mid-21st century, all but 19 types face high or very high vulnerability with >50% of the area scoring in these categories. Measures for resilience explain most components of vulnerability as of 2014, with most targeted vegetation scoring low in adaptive capacity measures and variably for specific sensitivity measures. Elevated climate exposure explains increases in vulnerability between the current and mid-century time periods.