Abstract:Wetland bird species have been declining in population size worldwide as climate warming and land-use change affect their suitable habitats. We used species distribution models (SDMs) to predict changes in range dynamics for 64 non-passerine wetland birds breeding in Europe, including range size, position of centroid, and margins. We fitted the SDMs with data collected for the first European Breeding Bird Atlas (EBBA1) and climate and land-use data to predict distributional changes over a century (the 1970s–20… Show more
“…SDM forecasts with static covariates and space‐for‐time substitution have accurately predicted future species' distribution for some species, but have performed poorly for others (Araujo et al, 2005 ; Kharouba et al, 2009 ; Pearman et al, 2008 ; Soultan et al, 2022 ). Moreover, even for SDMs that accurately predicted future species distributions, prediction accuracies for sites at which distribution changes occurred were often low suggesting that improvements to forecasting based on SDMs are needed (Briscoe et al, 2021 ; Illán et al, 2014 ; Rapacciuolo et al, 2012 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SDM forecasts with static covariates and space-for-time substitution have accurately predicted future species' distribution for some species, but have performed poorly for others (Araujo et al, 2005;Kharouba et al, 2009;Pearman et al, 2008;Soultan et al, 2022).…”
Section: Con Cluding Remark Smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A spatial climate difference associated with variation in occurrence or abundance of a species is assumed to have the same effect as an equivalent change in climate through time at a single location. SDMs built with data from one time period and forecast or hindcast to a different period have given robust spatial predictions, but exceptions are common across a range of taxa, including birds (Araujo et al, 2005 ; Soultan et al, 2022 ), mammals (Davis et al, 2014 ), butterflies (Kharouba et al, 2009 ), and plants (Dobrowski et al, 2011 ; Pearman et al, 2008 ; Pearson et al, 2006 ; Veloz et al, 2012 ; Worth et al, 2014 ). Moreover, even for SDMs that accurately predicted future species distributions, occurrences or abundances at the sites where change occurred were often poorly predicted (Briscoe et al, 2021 ; Illán et al, 2014 ; Rapacciuolo et al, 2012 ).…”
The relationships between species abundance or occurrence versus spatial variation in climate are commonly used in species distribution models to forecast future distributions. Under "space-for-time substitution", the effects of climate variation on species are assumed to be equivalent in both space and time. Two unresolved issues of
“…SDM forecasts with static covariates and space‐for‐time substitution have accurately predicted future species' distribution for some species, but have performed poorly for others (Araujo et al, 2005 ; Kharouba et al, 2009 ; Pearman et al, 2008 ; Soultan et al, 2022 ). Moreover, even for SDMs that accurately predicted future species distributions, prediction accuracies for sites at which distribution changes occurred were often low suggesting that improvements to forecasting based on SDMs are needed (Briscoe et al, 2021 ; Illán et al, 2014 ; Rapacciuolo et al, 2012 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SDM forecasts with static covariates and space-for-time substitution have accurately predicted future species' distribution for some species, but have performed poorly for others (Araujo et al, 2005;Kharouba et al, 2009;Pearman et al, 2008;Soultan et al, 2022).…”
Section: Con Cluding Remark Smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A spatial climate difference associated with variation in occurrence or abundance of a species is assumed to have the same effect as an equivalent change in climate through time at a single location. SDMs built with data from one time period and forecast or hindcast to a different period have given robust spatial predictions, but exceptions are common across a range of taxa, including birds (Araujo et al, 2005 ; Soultan et al, 2022 ), mammals (Davis et al, 2014 ), butterflies (Kharouba et al, 2009 ), and plants (Dobrowski et al, 2011 ; Pearman et al, 2008 ; Pearson et al, 2006 ; Veloz et al, 2012 ; Worth et al, 2014 ). Moreover, even for SDMs that accurately predicted future species distributions, occurrences or abundances at the sites where change occurred were often poorly predicted (Briscoe et al, 2021 ; Illán et al, 2014 ; Rapacciuolo et al, 2012 ).…”
The relationships between species abundance or occurrence versus spatial variation in climate are commonly used in species distribution models to forecast future distributions. Under "space-for-time substitution", the effects of climate variation on species are assumed to be equivalent in both space and time. Two unresolved issues of
“…Nonetheless, a biotic lag can be inferred by projecting ENMs calibrated on past data to the present day; where distribution shifts are in the direction but not of the magnitude projected it may suggest a contemporary biotic lag (Fig. 2b) (Lewthwaite et al, 2018;Soultan et al, 2022). Such biotic lags can also be quantified in terms of spatial distance (distance of biotic lag; Fig.…”
Section: Application Of Sfts To Climate-biotic Relationships (1) Popu...mentioning
In an epoch of rapid environmental change, understanding and predicting how biodiversity will respond to a changing climate is one of the most urgent challenges faced in ecology and evolution. Since we seldom have sufficient long-term biological data to use the past to anticipate the future, spatial climate-biotic associations are often used as a proxy for predicting biotic responses to climate change over time. These ‘space-for-time substitutions’ (SFTS) have become near ubiquitous in global change biology, but with different subfields having largely developed in isolation. We review how climate-focussed SFTS are used in four subfields of global change biology, each focussed on a different response type – population phenotypes, population genotypes, species’ distributions, and ecological communities. We identify the similarities and differences between the methods, the limitations and opportunities within each subfield, and highlight the potential for different subfields to gain insight from each other. While SFTS are used for a wide range of applications, two main approaches are applied across subfields: in situ gradient methods (including ecological niche modelling) and transplants (common gardens and reciprocal transplants). All SFTS methods and applications share a number of key limitations and assumptions relating to (i) the causality of identified spatial associations and (ii) the transferability of these relationships over time. Despite their widespread use, key assumptions in SFTS remain largely untested, including the fundamental assumption that climate-biotic relationships observed over space are causal and are equivalent to those occurring over time. We highlight how the robustness of SFTS can be improved by addressing these assumptions and limitations, with a particular emphasis on where approaches could be shared between subfields.
“…Particularly, the waterbirds show a high degree of adaptability to these challenges, because they establish new quarters of wintering (Fox et al, 2019). Also, the displacement of the breeding range for some wetland species was documented as a consequence of the changes of the latitudinal temperature and of the corresponding changed pattern of precipitations (Soultan et al, 2022), though the wintering bird communities are tracking the climate change faster than the breeding communities (Lehikoinen et al, 2021). A recent study on the European birds revealed that the rising temperatures are affecting even the morphology of the birds, while some species reduced their body size and other increased it (McLean et al, 2022).…”
An attempt to find a link between the global warming, manifested on local scale, and the dynamics of the winter avifauna recorded on the Vâlcele, Budeasa, Bascov, Piteşti and Goleşti Dam Basins from ROSPA0062 Lacurile de acumulare de pe Argeş was achieved in the paper. Based on the data collected between 1999 and 2020 during the MidWinter (the Winter Census of the Wetland Birds), some major conclusions were drawn: the climate change resulted from the analyse of the air temperature registered in the area and it was noticeable in some measure on the phenology of the birds; it influenced the dynamics of the avifauna, as total number of species and individuals, as well as the strength of every species; also, other local and extern elements, like the process of silting of the dam basins, the direct anthropogenic pressure, were involved here.
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.