{"title":"更好地利用追踪数据可以揭示物种分布的时空变异性和种内变异性","authors":"Michiel P. Boom, W. Daniel Kissling","doi":"10.1111/ecog.07246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Understanding geographic ranges and species distributions is crucial for effective conservation, especially in the light of climate and land use change. However, the spatial, temporal and intraspecific resolution of digital accessible information on species distributions is often limited. Here, we suggest to make better use of high-resolution tracking data to address existing limitations of occurrence records such as spatial biases (e.g. lack of observations in parts of the geographic range), temporal biases (e.g. lack of observations during a certain period of the year), and insufficient information on intraspecific variability (e.g. lack of population- or individual-level variation). Addressing these gaps can improve our knowledge on geographic ranges, intra-annual changes in species distributions, and population-level differences in habitat and space use. We demonstrate this with tracking data and species distribution models (SDMs) of the barnacle goose, a migratory bird species wintering in western Europe and breeding in the Arctic. Our analyses show that tracking data can 1) supplement occurrence records from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) in remote areas such as the European and Russian Arctic, 2) improve information on the temporal use of wintering, staging and breeding areas of migratory species and 3) be used to reveal distribution patterns at the population level. We recommend a broader use of tracking data to address the Wallacean shortfall (i.e. the incomplete knowledge on the geographic distribution of species) and to improve forecasts of biodiversity responses to climate and land use change (e.g. species vulnerability assessments). To avoid common pitfalls, we provide six recommendations for consideration during the research cycle when using tracking data in species distribution modelling, including steps to assess biases and integrate information on intraspecific variability in modelling approaches.","PeriodicalId":51026,"journal":{"name":"Ecography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Making better use of tracking data can reveal the spatiotemporal and intraspecific variability of species distributions\",\"authors\":\"Michiel P. Boom, W. Daniel Kissling\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ecog.07246\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Understanding geographic ranges and species distributions is crucial for effective conservation, especially in the light of climate and land use change. However, the spatial, temporal and intraspecific resolution of digital accessible information on species distributions is often limited. Here, we suggest to make better use of high-resolution tracking data to address existing limitations of occurrence records such as spatial biases (e.g. lack of observations in parts of the geographic range), temporal biases (e.g. lack of observations during a certain period of the year), and insufficient information on intraspecific variability (e.g. lack of population- or individual-level variation). Addressing these gaps can improve our knowledge on geographic ranges, intra-annual changes in species distributions, and population-level differences in habitat and space use. We demonstrate this with tracking data and species distribution models (SDMs) of the barnacle goose, a migratory bird species wintering in western Europe and breeding in the Arctic. Our analyses show that tracking data can 1) supplement occurrence records from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) in remote areas such as the European and Russian Arctic, 2) improve information on the temporal use of wintering, staging and breeding areas of migratory species and 3) be used to reveal distribution patterns at the population level. We recommend a broader use of tracking data to address the Wallacean shortfall (i.e. the incomplete knowledge on the geographic distribution of species) and to improve forecasts of biodiversity responses to climate and land use change (e.g. species vulnerability assessments). To avoid common pitfalls, we provide six recommendations for consideration during the research cycle when using tracking data in species distribution modelling, including steps to assess biases and integrate information on intraspecific variability in modelling approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecography\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.07246\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecography","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.07246","RegionNum":1,"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}
Making better use of tracking data can reveal the spatiotemporal and intraspecific variability of species distributions
Understanding geographic ranges and species distributions is crucial for effective conservation, especially in the light of climate and land use change. However, the spatial, temporal and intraspecific resolution of digital accessible information on species distributions is often limited. Here, we suggest to make better use of high-resolution tracking data to address existing limitations of occurrence records such as spatial biases (e.g. lack of observations in parts of the geographic range), temporal biases (e.g. lack of observations during a certain period of the year), and insufficient information on intraspecific variability (e.g. lack of population- or individual-level variation). Addressing these gaps can improve our knowledge on geographic ranges, intra-annual changes in species distributions, and population-level differences in habitat and space use. We demonstrate this with tracking data and species distribution models (SDMs) of the barnacle goose, a migratory bird species wintering in western Europe and breeding in the Arctic. Our analyses show that tracking data can 1) supplement occurrence records from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) in remote areas such as the European and Russian Arctic, 2) improve information on the temporal use of wintering, staging and breeding areas of migratory species and 3) be used to reveal distribution patterns at the population level. We recommend a broader use of tracking data to address the Wallacean shortfall (i.e. the incomplete knowledge on the geographic distribution of species) and to improve forecasts of biodiversity responses to climate and land use change (e.g. species vulnerability assessments). To avoid common pitfalls, we provide six recommendations for consideration during the research cycle when using tracking data in species distribution modelling, including steps to assess biases and integrate information on intraspecific variability in modelling approaches.
期刊介绍:
ECOGRAPHY publishes exciting, novel, and important articles that significantly advance understanding of ecological or biodiversity patterns in space or time. Papers focusing on conservation or restoration are welcomed, provided they are anchored in ecological theory and convey a general message that goes beyond a single case study. We encourage papers that seek advancing the field through the development and testing of theory or methodology, or by proposing new tools for analysis or interpretation of ecological phenomena. Manuscripts are expected to address general principles in ecology, though they may do so using a specific model system if they adequately frame the problem relative to a generalized ecological question or problem.
Purely descriptive papers are considered only if breaking new ground and/or describing patterns seldom explored. Studies focused on a single species or single location are generally discouraged unless they make a significant contribution to advancing general theory or understanding of biodiversity patterns and processes. Manuscripts merely confirming or marginally extending results of previous work are unlikely to be considered in Ecography.
Papers are judged by virtue of their originality, appeal to general interest, and their contribution to new developments in studies of spatial and temporal ecological patterns. There are no biases with regard to taxon, biome, or biogeographical area.