Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2023
DOI: 10.1007/s10265-023-01457-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The influence of climate and population density on Buxus hyrcana potential distribution and habitat connectivity

Abstract: Changes in environmental factors, human impact, and interactions between them accelerate the extinction of woody species. Therefore, conservation programs are needed to protect endangered taxa. However, the relationship between climate, habitat fragmentation, and anthropogenic activities and their consequences are still not well understood. In this work, we aimed to evaluate the impact of climate change and human population density on the Buxus hyrcana Pojark distribution range, as well as the phenomenon of ha… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 81 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Secondly, a further challenge in species range predictions is the choice of algorithms and climatic predictors, which strongly affect the accuracy of SDMs and are key to ensuring the reproducibility of the methods and thus provide a source of projections uncertainty (Konowalik and Nosol 2021;Zurell et al 2023). Thus, the observed discrepancies between our estimation and the previous SDM projections reported by Alipour and Walas (2023), Taleshi et al (2019) are due to the use of different methodological approaches. One of the major constraints relates to using climate rasters that may fail to capture the effects of topography on microclimate (Gavin et al 2014;Karger et al 2017).…”
Section: Conservation Prioritization and Study Limitationscontrasting
confidence: 88%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Secondly, a further challenge in species range predictions is the choice of algorithms and climatic predictors, which strongly affect the accuracy of SDMs and are key to ensuring the reproducibility of the methods and thus provide a source of projections uncertainty (Konowalik and Nosol 2021;Zurell et al 2023). Thus, the observed discrepancies between our estimation and the previous SDM projections reported by Alipour and Walas (2023), Taleshi et al (2019) are due to the use of different methodological approaches. One of the major constraints relates to using climate rasters that may fail to capture the effects of topography on microclimate (Gavin et al 2014;Karger et al 2017).…”
Section: Conservation Prioritization and Study Limitationscontrasting
confidence: 88%
“…This applies to boxwood in the Hyrcanian ecoregion, for which the forecasted climate changes may markedly affect the species range across the landscape. Most present-day Buxus hyrcana populations are seriously threatened and devastated by the spread of boxwood blight and box-tree moth (Alipour and Walas 2023;Nacambo et al 2014). Although the genetic diversity in the species currently remains relatively high (Esmaeilnezhad et al 2020;Salehi Shanjani et al 2018), there is a justified concern for the loss of variability, especially if genetic drift becomes a dominant evolutionary force and is accompanied by an observed reduction in population size which are likely to get worse under future climate change.…”
Section: Conservation Prioritization and Study Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The four RCPs are called after a hypothetical range of Radiative Forcing values in the year 2100 relative to pre-industrial levels ranging from + 2.6, + 4.5, + 6.0, to + 8.5 W/m 2 (Weyant et al, 2009). RCP2.6 is optimistic scenario estimating about 1°C increase before the end of XXI century, RCP4.5 is moderate scenario estimating 1.8°C increase, and RCP8.5 is pessimistic, scenario estimating about 3.7°C increase (Collins et al, 2013;Alipour and Walas, 2023). Here, we selected the RCP2.6 as the minimum emission representative and RCP8.5 as the maximum emission representative models to simulate habitat suitability distributions of A. altilis in the 2050s and 2070s (Beaumont et al, 2008).…”
Section: Sdm and Climate Change Rcp Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%