Uncertainty in consensus predictions of plant species' vulnerability to climate change

IF 4.6 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Diversity and Distributions Pub Date : 2024-06-27 DOI:10.1111/ddi.13898
Miranda Brooke Rose, Santiago José Elías Velazco, Helen M. Regan, Alan L. Flint, Lorraine E. Flint, James H. Thorne, Janet Franklin
{"title":"Uncertainty in consensus predictions of plant species' vulnerability to climate change","authors":"Miranda Brooke Rose,&nbsp;Santiago José Elías Velazco,&nbsp;Helen M. Regan,&nbsp;Alan L. Flint,&nbsp;Lorraine E. Flint,&nbsp;James H. Thorne,&nbsp;Janet Franklin","doi":"10.1111/ddi.13898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>Variation in spatial predictions of species' ranges made by various models has been recognized as a significant source of uncertainty for modelling species distributions. Consensus approaches that combine the results of multiple models have been employed to reduce the uncertainty introduced by different algorithms. We evaluate how estimates of habitat suitability, projected using species distribution models (SDMs), varied among different consensus methods relative to the variation introduced by different global climate models (GCMs) and representative concentration pathways (RCPs) used for projection.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Location</h3>\n \n <p>California Floristic Province (California, US portion).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We modelled the current and future potential distributions of 82 terrestrial plant species, developing model predictions under different combinations of GCMs, RCPs, time periods, dispersal assumptions and SDM consensus methods commonly used to combine different species distribution modelling algorithms. We assessed how each of these factors contributed to the variability in future predictions of species habitat suitability change and aggregate measures of proportional change in species richness. We also related variability in species-level habitat change to species' attributes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Assuming full dispersal capacity, the variability between habitat predictions made by different consensus methods was higher than the variability introduced by different RCPs and GCMs. The relationships between species' attributes and variability in future habitat predictions depended on the source of uncertainty and dispersal assumptions. However, species with small ranges or low prevalence tended to be associated with high variability in range change forecasts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Our results support exploring multiple consensus approaches when considering changes in habitat suitability outside of species' current distributions, especially when projecting species with low prevalence and small range sizes, as these species tend to be of the greatest conservation concern yet produce highly variable model outputs. Differences in vulnerability between diverging greenhouse gas concentration scenarios are most readily observed for end-of-century time periods and within species' currently occupied habitats (no dispersal).</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51018,"journal":{"name":"Diversity and Distributions","volume":"30 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ddi.13898","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diversity and Distributions","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ddi.13898","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

Variation in spatial predictions of species' ranges made by various models has been recognized as a significant source of uncertainty for modelling species distributions. Consensus approaches that combine the results of multiple models have been employed to reduce the uncertainty introduced by different algorithms. We evaluate how estimates of habitat suitability, projected using species distribution models (SDMs), varied among different consensus methods relative to the variation introduced by different global climate models (GCMs) and representative concentration pathways (RCPs) used for projection.

Location

California Floristic Province (California, US portion).

Methods

We modelled the current and future potential distributions of 82 terrestrial plant species, developing model predictions under different combinations of GCMs, RCPs, time periods, dispersal assumptions and SDM consensus methods commonly used to combine different species distribution modelling algorithms. We assessed how each of these factors contributed to the variability in future predictions of species habitat suitability change and aggregate measures of proportional change in species richness. We also related variability in species-level habitat change to species' attributes.

Results

Assuming full dispersal capacity, the variability between habitat predictions made by different consensus methods was higher than the variability introduced by different RCPs and GCMs. The relationships between species' attributes and variability in future habitat predictions depended on the source of uncertainty and dispersal assumptions. However, species with small ranges or low prevalence tended to be associated with high variability in range change forecasts.

Main Conclusions

Our results support exploring multiple consensus approaches when considering changes in habitat suitability outside of species' current distributions, especially when projecting species with low prevalence and small range sizes, as these species tend to be of the greatest conservation concern yet produce highly variable model outputs. Differences in vulnerability between diverging greenhouse gas concentration scenarios are most readily observed for end-of-century time periods and within species' currently occupied habitats (no dispersal).

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
植物物种易受气候变化影响的共识预测的不确定性
目的各种模型对物种分布区空间预测的差异已被认为是物种分布建模不确定性的一个重要来源。为了减少不同算法带来的不确定性,人们采用了综合多种模型结果的共识方法。我们评估了使用物种分布模型(SDMs)预测的栖息地适宜性估计值在不同共识方法之间的差异,以及不同全球气候模型(GCMs)和用于预测的代表性浓度路径(RCPs)所带来的差异。方法我们对 82 种陆生植物的当前和未来潜在分布进行了建模,在不同的全球气候模型、代表性浓度路径、时间段、扩散假设和 SDM 共识方法组合下进行了模型预测,这些方法通常用于组合不同的物种分布建模算法。我们评估了这些因素对物种生境适宜性未来变化预测的影响,以及物种丰富度比例变化的综合影响。我们还将物种水平栖息地变化的变异性与物种属性联系起来。结果 假设具有完全的扩散能力,不同共识方法对栖息地预测的变异性高于不同 RCP 和 GCM 带来的变异性。物种属性与未来栖息地预测变异性之间的关系取决于不确定性来源和扩散假设。主要结论我们的研究结果支持在考虑物种当前分布区以外的栖息地适宜性变化时,探索多种共识方法,尤其是在预测低流行率和分布区较小的物种时,因为这些物种往往是最值得关注的保护对象,但其模型输出结果却变化很大。不同温室气体浓度方案之间的脆弱性差异最容易在本世纪末时段和物种目前居住的栖息地(无扩散)内观察到。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Diversity and Distributions
Diversity and Distributions 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
195
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
期刊介绍: Diversity and Distributions is a journal of conservation biogeography. We publish papers that deal with the application of biogeographical principles, theories, and analyses (being those concerned with the distributional dynamics of taxa and assemblages) to problems concerning the conservation of biodiversity. We no longer consider papers the sole aim of which is to describe or analyze patterns of biodiversity or to elucidate processes that generate biodiversity.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Cover page Contrasting Patterns of Population Genomic Structure Between Broadcast-Spawning and Brooding Corals in Southeast Asia Issue Information Non-Native, Non-Naturalised Plants Suffer Less Herbivory Than Native Plants Across European Botanical Gardens
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1