Beyond a climate-centric view of plant distribution: Edaphic variables add value to distribution models

PLoS ONE

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2014, Pages

  Beauregard, Frieda ^a   De Blois, Sylvie ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABIOTIC STRESS; ACCURACY; ARTICLE; BIOGEOGRAPHY; CLIMATE; DATA BASE; EDAPHIC VARIABLE; HABITAT QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; PLANT COMMUNITY; PLANT GROWTH; PREDICTION; PREVALENCE; SOIL PROPERTY; SPECIES DISTRIBUTION; SPECIES DIVERSITY; VEGETATION;

CLIMATE; DATABASES, FACTUAL; ECOSYSTEM; GEOGRAPHY; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PLANT DISPERSAL; QUEBEC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84899075679     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092642     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Thuiller W, Lavorel S, Araujo MB, Sykes MT, Prentice IC (2005) Climate change threats to plant diversity in Europe. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 8245-8250. (Pubitemid 40800074)
2. Young N, Stohlgren T, Evangelista P, Kumar S, Graham J, et al. (2012) Regional data refine local predictions: modeling the distribution of plant species abundance on a portion of the central plains. Environ Monit Assess 184: 5439-5451.
3. Rupprecht F, Oldeland J, Finckh M (2011) Modelling potential distribution of the threatened tree species Juniperus oxycedrus: How to evaluate the predictions of different modelling approaches? J Veg Sci 22: 647-659.
4. Aranda SC, Lobo JM (2011) How well does presence-only-based species distribution modelling predict assemblage diversity? A case study of the Tenerife flora. Ecography 34: 31-38.
5. Heikkinen RK, Luoto M, Araújo MB, Virkkala R, Thuiller W, et al. (2006) Methods and uncertainties in bioclimatic envelope modelling under climate change. Prog Phys Geogr 30: 751-777. (Pubitemid 46090481)
6. Syphard AD, Franklin J (2009) Differences in spatial predictions among species distribution modeling methods vary with species traits and environmental predictors. Ecography 32: 907-918.
7. Coudun C, Gegout JC, Piedallu C, Rameau JC (2006) Soil nutritional factors improve models of plant species distribution: an illustration with Acer campestre (L.) in France. J Biogeogr 33: 1750-1763. (Pubitemid 44376070)
8. Austin MP, Van Niel KP (2011) Impact of landscape predictors on climate change modelling of species distributions: A case study with Eucalyptus fastigata in southern New South Wales, Australia. J Biogeogr 38: 9-19.
9. Sormunen H, Virtanen R, Luoto M (2011) Inclusion of local environmental conditions alters high-latitude vegetation change predictions based on bioclimatic models. Polar Biol 34: 883-897.
10. Bertrand R, Perez V, Gegout JC (2012) Disregarding the edaphic dimension in species distribution models leads to the omission of crucial spatial information under climate change: the case of Quercus pubescens in France. Glob Chang Biol 18: 2648-2660.
11. Dubuis A, Giovanettina S, Pellissier L, Pottier J, Vittoz P, et al. (2013) Improving the prediction of plant species distribution and community composition by adding edaphic to topo-climatic variables. J Veg Sci 24: 593-606.
12. Hanspach J, Kühn I, Pompe S, Klotz S (2010) Predictive performance of plant species distribution models depends on species traits. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 12: 219-225.
13. Thuiller W (2013) On the importance of edaphic variables to predict plant species distributions - limits and prospects. J Veg Sci 24: 591-592.
14. Marage D, Gegout JC (2009) Importance of soil nutrients in the distribution of forest communities on a large geographical scale. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 18: 88-97.
15. Franklin J (2009) Mapping species distributions: spatial inference and prediction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 338 p.
16. Elith J, Leathwick JR (2009) Species distribution models: ecological explanation and prediction across space and time. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40: 677-697.
17. Austin MP, Van Niel KP (2011) Improving species distribution models for climate change studies: variable selection and scale. J Biogeogr 38: 1-8.
18. Dengler J, Jansen F, Glöckler F, Peet RK, De Cáceres M, et al. (2011) The Global Index of Vegetation-Plot Databases (GIVD): a new resource for vegetation science. J Veg Sci 22: 582-597.
19. Olson DM, Dinerstein E, Wikramanayake ED, Burgess ND, Powell GVN, et al. (2001) Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: A New Map of Life on Earth. Bioscience 51: 933-938. (Pubitemid 33072658)
20. Lobo JM, Jiménez-Valverde A, Real R (2008) AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models. Glob Chang Biol 17: 145-151. (Pubitemid 351228538)
21. Chambers D, Périé C, Casajus N, de Blois S (2013) Challenges in modelling the abundance of 105 tree species in eastern North America using climate, edaphic, and topographic variables. For Ecol Manage 291: 20-29.
22. Rousseau C (1974) Géographie floristique du Québec- Labrador: distribution des principales espèces vasculaires. Quebec City: Presses de l'Université Laval. 798 p.
23. Saucier JP, Robitaille A, Bergeron JF (2003) Vegetation zones and bioclimatic domains in Quebec. Quebec City: Ministère des Ressources naturelles du Quèbec. 2 p.
24. Philips DW, Sanderson M (1991) Canada precipitation. Ottawa: National Atlas Information Service, Geographical Services Division, Centre for Mapping, Energy, Mines and Resources. Map document.
25. Gosselin J, Major M (2012) Vegetation Database of Québec (MRNF). In: Dengler J, Oldeland J, Jansen F, Chytrý M, Ewald J, et al., editors. Vegetation databases for the 21st century. Biodivers Ecol 4: 432-432.
26. Saucier JP, Berger JP, D'Avignon H, Racine P, Robitaille A, et al. (1994) Le point d'observation ecologique. Quebec City: Ministère des Ressources naturelles du Québec. 124 p.
27. Stockwell DRB, Peterson AT (2002) Effects of sample size on accuracy of species distribution models. Ecol Modell 148: 1-13. (Pubitemid 34124426)
28. Wisz MS, Hijmans RJ, Li J, Peterson AT, Graham CH, et al. (2008) Effects of sample size on the performance of species distribution models. Divers Distrib 14: 763-773.
29. Hutchinson MF (2002) ANUSPLIN Version 4.2 User's Guide. Canberra, Australia: Australian National University, Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies. 50 p.
30. Rehfeldt GE (2006) A spline model of climate for the Western United States. Fort Collins, Colorado: United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.
31. Nelson BD (2001) Variable reduction for modeling using PROC VARCLUS. Cary, North Carolina: Proceddings of the twenty-sixth annual SAS Users Group International Conference.
32. Thuiller W, Lafourcade B, Engler R, Araújo MB (2009) BIOMOD-a platform for ensemble forecasting of species distributions. Ecography 32: 369-373.
33. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33: 159-174. (Pubitemid 8054849)
34. Fielding AH, Bell JF (1997) A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ Conserv 24: 38-49. (Pubitemid 27376840)
35. Jones CC, Acker SA, Halpern CB (2010) Combining local- and large-scale models to predict the distributions of invasive plant species. Ecol Appl 20: 311-326.
36. Araujo MB, Pearson RG, Thuiller W, Erhard M (2005) Validation of speciesclimate impact models under climate change. Glob Chang Biol 11: 1504-1513. (Pubitemid 43898772)
37. Swets J (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240: 1285-1293.
38. Wang T, Campbell EM, O'Neill GA, Aitken SN (2012) Projecting future distributions of ecosystem climate niches: Uncertainties and management applications. For Ecol Manage 279: 128-140.
39. de Blois S, Domon G, Bouchard A (2001) Environmental, historical, and contextual determinants of vegetation cover: a landscape perspective. Landsc Ecol 16: 421-436. (Pubitemid 32897168)
40. Lenoir J, Gegout JC, Marquet PA, de Ruffray P, Brisse H (2008) A significant upward shift in plant species optimum elevation during the 20th century. Science 320: 1768-1771. (Pubitemid 351931289)
41. Cote B, Fyles J (1994) Nutrient concentration and acid-base status of leaf litter of tree species characteristic of the hardwood forest of southern Quebec. Can J For Res 24: 192-196.
42. Lafleur B, Paré D, Munson AD, Bergeron Y (2010) Response of northeastern North American forests to climate change: Will soil conditions constrain tree species migration? Environ Rev 18: 279-289.
43. Ponge JF (2003) Humus forms in terrestrial ecosystems: a framework to biodiversity. Soil Biol Biochem 35: 935-945.
44. Ascher J, Sartori G, Graefe U, Thornton B, Ceccherini M, et al. (2012) Are humus forms, mesofauna and microflora in subalpine forest soils sensitive to thermal conditions? Biol Fertil Soils 48: 709-725.
45. Mateo RG, Croat TB, Felicísimo AM, Muñoz J (2010) Profile or group discriminative techniques? Generating reliable species distribution models using pseudo-absences and target-group absences from natural history collections. Divers Distrib 16: 84-94.
46. Attorre F, Alfò M, De Sanctis M, Francesconi F, Valenti R, et al. (2011) Evaluating the effects of climate change on tree species abundance and distribution in the Italian peninsula. Appl Veg Sci 14: 242-255.
47. Berteaux D, de Blois S, Angers JF, Bonin J, Casajus N, et al. (2010) The CC-Bio Project: Studying the effects of climate change on Quebec biodiversity. Divers 2: 1181-1204.
48. McKenney DW, Pedlar JH, Rood RB, Price D (2011) Revisiting projected shifts in the climate envelopes of North American trees using updated general circulation models. Global Change Biol. 17: 2720-2730.