The influence of species interactions on geographic range change under climate change

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Volumn 1249, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 18-28

  Hellmann, Jessica J ^a   Prior, Kirsten M ^b   Pelini, Shannon L ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Biogeography; Case studies; Climate change; Enemy release; Host specialization; Management implications

Indexed keywords

AIR TEMPERATURE; ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; CLIMATE CHANGE; COEVOLUTION; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; HABITAT SELECTION; MIGRATION; ORGANISMAL INTERACTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; RESOURCE PARTITIONING; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

EID: 84857460923     PISSN: 00778923     EISSN: 17496632     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06410.x     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Davis, M.B. & R.G. Shaw 2001. Range shifts and adaptive responses to Quaternary climate change. Science 292: 673-679.
2. Chen, I.-C. et al 2011. Rapid range shifts of species associated with high levels of climate warming. Science 333: 1024-1026.
3. Botkin, D.B. et al 2010. Forecasting the effects of global warming on biodiversity. Bioscience 57: 227-236.
4. Kelley, P. et al 2003. Predator-prey Interactions in the Fossil Record. Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, NY
5. Jackson, S.T. & C. Weng 1999. Late quaternary extinction of a tree species in eastern North America. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96: 13847-13852.
6. McLachlan, J.S. et al 2005. Molecular indicators of tree migration capacity under rapid climate change. Ecology 86: 2088-2098.
7. Kidwell, S.M. & K.W. Flessa 1995. The quality of the fossil record: populations, species, and communities. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 26: 269-299.
8. Münkemüller, T. et al 2009. Disappearing refuges in time and space: how environmental change threatens species coexistence. Theor. Ecol. 2: 217-227.
9. Brooker, R.W. et al. 2007. Modelling species' range shifts in a changing climate: the impacts of biotic interactions, dispersal distance and the rate of climate change. J. Theor. Biol. 245: 59-65.
10. Atkins, K.E. & J.M.J. Travis 2010. Local adaptation and the evolution of species' ranges under climate change. J. Theor. Biol. 266: 449-457.
11. Gilman, S.E. et al 2010. A framework for community interactions under climate change. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25: 325-331.
12. VanderPutten, W.H. et al 2010. Predicting species distribution and abundance responses to climate change: why it is essential to include biotic interactions across trophic levels. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. 365: 2025-2034.
13. Cunningham, H.R. et al 2009. Competition at the range boundary in the slimy salamander: using reciprocal transplants for studies on the role of biotic interactions in spatial distributions. J. Anim. Ecol. 78: 52-62.
14. Midgley, G.F. et al 2006. Migration rate limitations on climate change-induced range shifts in Cape Proteaceae. Diversity Distrib. 12: 555-562.
15. Loarie, S.R. et al 2009. The velocity of climate change. Nature 462: 1052-1055.
16. Jules, E.S. & P. Shahani 2003. A broader ecological context to habitat fragmentation: why matrix habitat is more important than we thought. J. Veg. Sci. 14: 459-464.
17. Menéndez, R. et al. 2008. Escape from natural enemies during climate-driven range expansion: a case study. Ecol. Entomol. 33: 413-421.
18. Hof, C. et al 2011. Rethinking species' ability to cope with rapid climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 17: 2987-2990.
19. Sexton, J.P. et al 2009. Evolution and ecology of species range limits. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40: 415-436.
20. Brown, J.H. et al 1995. Spatial variation in abundance. Ecology 76: 2028-2043.
21. Pelini, S.L. et al 2009. Translocation experiments with butterflies reveal limits to enhancement of poleward populations under climate change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106: 11160-11165.
22. Brown, J.H. et al 1996. The geographic range: size, shape, boundaries, and internal structure. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 27: 597-623.
23. Sagarin, R.D. et al 2006. Moving beyond assumptions to understand abundance distributions across the ranges of species. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21: 524-530.
24. Hellmann, J.J. et al 2008. The response of two butterfly species to climatic variation at the edge of their range and the implications for poleward range shifts. Oecologia 157: 583-592.
25. Holt, R.D. & R. Gomulkiewicz 1997. How does immigration influence local adaptation? A reexamination of a familiar paradigm. Am. Nat. 149: 563-572.
26. Alleaume-Benharira, M. et al. 2006. Geographical patterns of adaptation within a species' range: interactions between drift and gene flow. J. Evol. Biol. 19: 203-215.
27. Savolainen, O. et al. 2007. Gene flow and local adaptation in trees. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 38: 595-619.
28. Belotte, D. et al. 2003. An experimental test of local adaptation in soil bacteria. Evolution 57: 27-36.
29. Greischar, M. A. & B. Koskella 2007. A synthesis of experimental work on parasite local adaptation. Ecol. Lett. 10: 418-434.
30. Kawecki, T.J. & D. Ebert 2004. Conceptual issues in local adaptation. Ecol. Lett. 7: 1225-1241.
31. Zakharov, E.V. & J.J. Hellmann 2008. Genetic differentiation across a latitudinal gradient in two co-occurring butterfly species: revealing population differences in a context of climate change. Mol. Ecol. 17: 189-208.
32. Pelini, S.L. et al 2009. Climate change and temporal and spatial mismatches in insect communities. In Climate Change: Observed Impacts on Planet Earth. T. Letcher, ed.: 215-231. Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
33. Merrill, R.M. et al 2008. Combined effects of climate and biotic interactions on the elevational range of a phytophagous insect. J. Anim. Ecol. 77: 145-155.
34. Graves, W.C. 1980. Annual oak mast yields from visual estimates. Proceedings of the Symposium on the Ecology, Management, and Utilization of California Oaks, 270-274. Claremont, California.
35. Aizen, M.A. & W.A. Patterson 1990. Acorn size and geographical range in the North American oaks (Quercus L.). J. Biogeogr. 17: 327.
36. Fuchs, M.A. & P.G. Krannitz 1999. Dispersal of garry oak acorns by steller's jays. Proceedings of a Conference on the Biology and Management of Species and Habitats at Risk, 263-266. Kamloops, British Columbia.
37. Marsico, T.D. et al 2009. Patterns of seed dispersal and pollen flow in Quercus garryana (Fagaceae) following post-glacial climatic changes. J. Biogeogr. 36: 929-941.
38. Ehrlich, P.R. & P.H. Raven 1964. Butterflies and plants: a study in coevolution. Evolution 18: 586-608.
39. Pelini, S.L., J. A. Keppel, A.E. Kelley & J.J. Hellmann 2010. Adaptation to host plants may prevent rapid insect responses to climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 16: 2923-2929.
40. Fox, L.R. & P.A. Morrow 1981. Specialization: species property or local phenomenon? Science 211: 887-893.
41. Sword, G.A. & E.B. Dopman 1999. Developmental specialization and geographic structure of host plant use in a polyphagous grasshopper, Schistocerca emarginata (=lineata) (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Oecologia 120: 437-445.
42. Parry, D. & R.A. Goyer 2004. Variation in the suitability of host tree species for geographically discrete populations of forest tent caterpillar. Environ. Entomol. 33: 1477-1487.
43. Thompson, J.N. 2005. The Geographic Mosaic of Coevolution. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
44. Prior, K.M. & J.J. Hellmann 2012. A review of the enemy release hypothesis as an explanation for the success of invasive species in multiple trophic levels and ecosystems. Invas. Spec. Global. World In press.
45. Callaway, R.M. et al 2004. Soil biota and exotic plant invasion. Nature 427: 731-733.
46. DeWalt, S.J. et al 2004. Natural-enemy release facilitates habitat expansion of the invasive tropical shrub Clidemia hirta. Ecology 85: 471-483.
47. Williams, J.L. et al 2010. Testing hypotheses for exotic plant success: parallel experiments in the native and introduced ranges. Ecology 91: 1355-1366.
48. Mitchell, C.E. et al 2006. Biotic interactions and plant invasions. Ecol. Lett. 9: 726-740.
49. Mueller, J.M. & J.J. Hellmann 2008. An assessment of invasion risk from assisted migration. Conserv. Biol. 22: 562-567.
50. Strauss, S.Y. et al 2006. Exotic taxa less related to native species are more invasive. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103: 5841-5845.
51. Engelkes, T. et al 2008. Successful range-expanding plants experience less above-ground and below-ground enemy impact. Nature 456: 946-948.
52. Rosenzweig, M.L. 1995. Species Diversity in Space and Time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
53. Schönrogge, K. et al 1998. Invaders on the move: parasitism in the sexual galls of four alien gall wasps in Britain (Hymenoptera: Cynipidae). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. 265: 1643-1650.
54. Gröbler, B.C. & O.T. Lewis 2008. Response of native parasitoids to a range-expanding host. Ecol. Entomol. 33: 453-463.
55. Prior, K.M. & J.J. Hellmann 2010. Impact of an invasive oak gall wasp on a native butterfly: a test of plant-mediated competition. Ecology 91: 3284-3293.
56. Prior, K.M. 2012. Novel community interactions following species' range expansions. Doctoral dissertation. University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN.
57. Sinclair, S.J. et al 2010. How useful are species distribution models for managing biodiversity under future climates? Ecol. Soc. 15 (1): 8. Retrieved January 16, 2012, from
58. Roberts, D.R. & A. Hamann 2011. Predicting potential climate change impacts with bioclimate envelope models: a palaeoecological perspective. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. doi:
59. Pearson, R.G. & T.P. Dawson 2003. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 12: 361-371.
60. Hijmans, R.J. & C.H. Graham 2006. The ability of climate envelope models to predict the effect of climate change on species distributions. Glob. Change Biol. 12: 2272-2281.
61. Morin, X. & M.J. Lechowicz 2008. Contemporary perspectives on the niche that can improve models of species range shifts under climate change. Biol. Lett. 4: 573-576.
62. Ibáñez, I. et al 2006. Predicting biodiversity change: outside the climate envelope, beyond the species-area curve. Ecology 87: 1896-906.
63. Wiens, J.A. et al 2009. Niches, models, and climate change: assessing the assumptions and uncertainties. Proc. Natl. Acac. Sci. USA 106: 19729-19736.
64. Araújo, M.B. & M. Luoto 2007. The importance of biotic interactions for modelling species distributions under climate change. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 16: 743-753.
65. Preston, K.L. et al 2008. Habitat shifts of endangered species under altered climate conditions: importance of biotic interactions. Glob. Change Biol. 14: 2501-2515.
66. Kearney, M. & W. Porter 2009. Mechanistic niche modelling: combining physiological and spatial data to predict species' ranges. Ecol. Lett. 12: 334-350.
67. Buckley, L. et al. 2011. Does including physiology improve species distribution model predictions of responses to recent climate change? Ecology 92: 2214-2221. doi:
68. Crozier, L. & G. Dwyer 2006. Combining population-dynamic and ecophysiological models to predict climate-induced insect range shifts. Am. Nat. 168: 853-866.
69. Beattie, M. 1996. An ecosystem approach to fish and wildlife conservation. Ecol. Appl. 6: 696-699.
70. Overpeck, J.T. et al 1992. Mapping eastern North American vegetation change of the past 18 ka: no-analogs and the future. Geology 20: 1071-1074.
71. Williams, J.W. et al 2007. Projected distributions of novel and disappearing climates by 2100 AD. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104: 5738-5742.
72. Hoegh-Guldberg, O. et al 2008. Assisted colonization and rapid climate change. Science 321: 345-346.
73. McLachlan, J.S. et al 2007. A framework for debate of assisted migration in an era of climate change. Conserv. Biol. 21: 297-302.
74. Richardson, D.M. et al 2009. Multidimensional evaluation of managed relocation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106: 9721-9724.
75. Hewitt, N. et al 2011. Taking stock of the assisted migration debate. Biol. Conserv. 144: 2560-2572.