Individualistic vs community modelling of species distributions under climate change

Ecography

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 55-65

  Baselga, Andrés ^a,b   Araújo, Miguel B ^a,c,d  

^a MUSEO NACIONAL DE CIENCIAS NATURALES   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELA   (Spain)

^c PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ÉVORA   (Portugal)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; COMMUNITY COMPOSITION; COMMUNITY DYNAMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; RANGE SIZE; SPECIES DIVERSITY;

EID: 63849138533     PISSN: 09067590     EISSN: 16000587     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05856.x     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Allouche, O. et al. 2006. Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic (TSS) J. Appl. Ecol. 43 : 1223 1232.
2. Araújo, M. B. Williams, P. H. 2000. Selecting areas for species persistence using occurrence data Biol. Conserv. 96 : 331 345.
3. Araújo, M. B. Pearson, R. G. 2005. Equilibrium of species' distributions with climate Ecography 28 : 693 695.
4. Araújo, M. B. Guisan, A. 2006. Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling J. Biogeogr. 33 : 1677 1688.
5. Araújo, M. B. Rahbek, C. 2006. How does climate change affect biodiversity? Science 313 : 1396 1397.
6. Araújo, M. B. Luoto, M. 2007. The importance of biotic interactions for modelling species distributions under climate change Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 16 : 743 753.
7. Araújo, M. B. New, M. 2007. Ensemble forecasting of species distributions Trends Ecol. Evol. 22 : 42 47.
8. Araújo, M. B. et al. 2005. Validation of species-climate impact models under climate change Global Change Biol. 11 : 1504 1513.
9. Austin, M. P. 2002. Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between ecological theory and statistical modelling Ecol. Model. 157 : 101 118.
10. Baselga, A. 2007. Disentangling distance decay of similarity from richness gradients: response to Soininen et al. 2007 Ecography 30 : 838 841.
11. Baselga, A. et al. 2007. A multiple-site similarity measure independent of richness Biol. Lett. 3 : 642 645.
12. Callaway, R. M. 2007. Positive interactions and interdependence in plant communities. Springer.
13. Callaway, R. M. et al. 2002. Positive interactions among alpine plants increase with stress Nature 417 : 844 848.
14. Chatfield, B. S. 2008. How to find the one that got away. Predicting the distribution of temperate demersal fish from environmental variables Ph. D. thesis, School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, Univ. of Western Australia.
15. Dos Santos, D. A. et al. 2008. Sympatry inference and network analysis in biogeography Syst. Biol. 57 : 432 448.
16. Elith, J. et al. 2006. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data Ecography 29 : 129 151.
17. Ferrier, S. Guisan, A. 2006. Spatial modelling of biodiversity at the community level J. Appl. Ecol. 43 : 393 404.
18. Ferrier, S. et al. 2002. Extended statistical approaches to modelling spatial pattern in biodiversity in northeast New South Wales. II. Community-level modelling Biodivers. Conserv. 11 : 2309 2338.
19. Ferrier, S. et al. 2007. Using generalized dissimilarity modelling to analyse and predict patterns of beta diversity in regional biodiversity assessment Divers. Distrib. 13 : 252 264.
20. Fielding, A. H. Bell, J. F. 1997. A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models Environ. Conserv. 24 : 38 49.
21. Freeman, E. 2007. PresenceAbsence: an R Package for presence-absence model evaluation .
22. Graham, R. W. Grimm, E. C. 1990. Effects of global climate change on the patterns of terrestrial biological communities Trends Ecol. Evol. 5 : 289 292.
23. Guisan, A. Zimmermann, N. E. 2000. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology Ecol. Model. 135 : 147 186.
24. Harrison, S. et al. 1992. Beta-diversity on geographic gradients in britain J. Anim. Ecol. 61 : 151 158.
25. Heikkinen, R. K. et al. 2006. Methods and uncertainties in bioclimatic envelope modelling under climate change Prog. Phys. Geogr. 30 : 751 777.
26. Heikkinen, R. K. et al. 2007. Biotic interactions improve prediction of boreal bird distributions at macro-scales Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 16 : 754 763.
27. Humphries, C. H. et al. 1999. Plant diversity in Europe: Atlas Florae Europaea and Worldmap Acta Bot. Fenn. 162 : 11 21.
28. - In: Jalas, J. Suominen, J. Atlas Florae Europaeae 1972-1996. The Committee for Mapping the Flora of Europe and Societas Biologica Fennica Vanamo.
29. Jiménez-Valverde, A. Lobo, J. M. 2006. The ghost of unbalanced species distribution data in geographical model predictions Divers. Distrib. 12 : 521 524.
30. Jordano, P. 2000. Fruits and frugivory Fenner, M. Seeds: the ecology of regeneration in natural plant communities. Commonw. Agric. Bur. Int 125 166.
31. Keith, D. A. et al. 2008. Predicting extinction risks under climate change: coupling stochastic population models with dynamic bioclimatic habitat models Biol. Lett. 4 : 560 563.
32. Koh, L. P. et al. 2004. Species coextinctions and the biodiversity crisis Science 305 : 1632 1634.
33. Koleff, P. et al. 2003. Measuring beta diversity for presence-absence data J. Anim. Ecol. 72 : 367 382.
34. Labandeira, C. 2002. The history of associations between plants and animals Herrera, C. Pellmyr, O. Plant-animal interactions. An evolutionary approach. Blackwell 26 74.
35. Labandeira, C. C. et al. 2002. Impact of the terminal Cretaceous event on plant-insect associations Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 99 : 2061 2066.
36. Lahti, T. Lampinen, R. 1999. From dot maps to bitmaps - Atlas Florae Europaeae goes digital Acta Bot. Fenn. 162 : 5 9.
37. Leathwick, J. R. et al. 2005. Using multivariate adaptive regression splines to predict the distributions of New Zealand's freshwater diadromous fish Freshwater Biol. 50 : 2034 2052.
38. Leathwick, J. R. et al. 2006. Comparative performance of generalized additive models and multivariate adaptive regression splines for statistical modelling of species distributions Ecol. Model. 199 : 188 196.
39. Liu, C. R. et al. 2005. Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distributions Ecography 28 : 385 393.
40. Lyons, S. K. 2003. A quantitative assessment of the range shifts of Pleistocene mammals J. Mammal. 84 : 385 402.
41. McGeoch, M. A. et al. 2006. Species and community responses to short-term climate manipulation: microarthropods in the sub-Antarctic Austral Ecol. 31 : 719 731.
42. Meynard, C. N. Quinn, J. F. 2007. Predicting species distributions: a critical comparison of the most common statistical models using artificial species J. Biogeogr. 34 : 1455 1469.
43. Midgley, G. F. et al. 2006. Migration rate limitations on climate change-induced range shifts in Cape Proteaceae Divers. Distrib. 12 : 555 562.
44. Moisen, G. G. Frescino, T. S. 2002. Comparing five modelling techniques for predicting forest characteristics Ecol. Model. 157 : 209 225.
45. Morin, X. et al. 2008. Tree species range shifts at a continental scale: new predictive insights from a process-based model J. Ecol. 96 : 784 794.
46. New, M. et al. 2002. A high-resolution data set of surface climate over global land areas Clim. Res. 21 : 1 25.
47. Peterson, A. T. et al. 2007. Transferability and model evaluation in ecological niche modeling: a comparison of GARP and Maxent Ecography 30 : 550 560.
48. Phillips, S. J. 2008. Transferability, sample selection bias and background data in presence-only modelling: a response to Peterson et al. (2007) Ecography 31 : 272 278.
49. Randin, C. F. et al. 2006. Are niche-based species distribution models transferable in space? J. Biogeogr. 33 : 1689 1703.
50. 2 on water availability in plant habitat models Biol. Lett. 4 : 556 559.
51. Schröter, D. et al. 2005. Ecosystem service supply and vulnerability to global change in Europe Science 310 : 1333 1337.
52. Segurado, P. Araújo, M. B. 2004. An evaluation of methods for modelling species distributions J. Biogeogr. 31 : 1555 1568.
53. Simakova, A. N. 2006. The vegetation of the Russian Plain during the second part of the Late Pleistocene (33-18 ka) Quat. Int. 149 : 110 114.
54. Stockwell, D. R. B. Peterson, A. T. 2002. Effects of sample size on accuracy of species distribution models Ecol. Model. 148 : 1 13.
55. Svenning, J. C. et al. 2008. Postglacial dispersal limitation of widespread forest plant species in nemoral Europe Ecography 31 : 316 326.
56. Thuiller, W. et al. 2003. Generalized models vs classification tree analysis: predicting spatial distributions of plant species at different scales J. Veg. Sci. 14 : 669 680.
57. Travis, J. M. J. et al. 2005. The interplay of positive and negative species interactions across an environmental gradient: insights from an individual-based simulation model Biol. Lett. 1 : 5 8.
58. Tsoar, A. et al. 2007. A comparative evaluation of presence-only methods for modelling species distribution Divers. Distrib. 13 : 397 405.
59. Williams, J. W. et al. 2001. Dissimilarity analyses of late-Quaternary vegetation and climate in eastern North America Ecology 82 : 3346 3362.
60. Williams, P. H. et al. 2000. Endemism and important areas for conserving European biodiversity: a preliminary exploration of Atlas data for plants and terrestrial vertebrates Belgian J. Entomol. 2 : 21 46.
61. Yee, T. W. 2004. A new technique for maximum-likelihood canonical Gaussian ordination Ecol. Monogr. 74 : 685 701.
62. Yee, T. W. 2006. Constrained additive ordination Ecology 87 : 203 213.