Abstract

Species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly used for extrapolation, or predicting suitable regions for species under new geographic or temporal scenarios. However, SDM predictions may be prone to errors if species are not at equilibrium with climatic conditions in the current range and if training samples are not representative. Here the controversial “Pleistocene rewilding” proposal was used as a novel example to address some of the challenges of extrapolating modeled species-climate relationships outside of current ranges. Climatic suitability for three proposed proxy species (Asian elephant, African cheetah and African lion) was extrapolated to the American southwest and Great Plains using Maxent, a machine-learning species distribution model. Similar models were fit for Oryx gazella, a species native to Africa that has naturalized in North America, to test model predictions. To overcome biases introduced by contracted modern ranges and limited occurrence data, random pseudo-presence points generated from modern and historical ranges were used for model training. For all species except the oryx, models of climatic suitability fit to training data from historical ranges produced larger areas of predicted suitability in North America than models fit to training data from modern ranges. Four naturalized oryx populations in the American southwest were correctly predicted with a generous model threshold, but none of these locations were predicted with a more stringent threshold. In general, the northern Great Plains had low climatic suitability for all focal species and scenarios considered, while portions of the southern Great Plains and American southwest had low to intermediate suitability for some species in some scenarios. The results suggest that the use of historical, in addition to modern, range information and randomly sampled pseudo-presence points may improve model accuracy. This has implications for modeling range shifts of organisms in response to climate change.

Highlights

  • Species distribution models (SDMs), known as bioclimatic or ecological niche models, climate envelope models and predictive habitat distribution models, statistically relate known species occurrences with environmental variables in order to predict potential regions of suitability for species or communities [1,2]

  • A species is assumed to be at equilibrium with climatic conditions in the current range; i.e., a species is present in almost all regions of the training area where climatic conditions are suitable

  • Kappa statistics were calculated from cumulative minimum training presence (MTP) and maximum training sensitivity plus specificity (MTSS) thresholded model outputs and a set of separately generated random pseudopresence and pseudo-absence points. *Thesholded Maxent predictions generated using modern range training data were evaluated using test files that corresponded with historical ranges. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012899.t003

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Species distribution models (SDMs), known as bioclimatic or ecological niche models, climate envelope models and predictive habitat distribution models, statistically relate known species occurrences with environmental variables in order to predict potential regions of suitability for species or communities [1,2]. There are two common uses of SDMs: (1) interpolation, or predicting entire distributions of organisms from limited occurrence data within the existing range and (2) extrapolation, or predicting suitable regions for species under novel geographic or temporal scenarios. It is assumed that the climatic niche is stable, such that climatic factors that limit a species’ occurrence in the current range will be limiting in the extrapolated area [21]. In order for this to be true, it is assumed that new ecological relationships (e.g., competition, predation) and new behavioral and/or evolutionary adaptations in the introduced area are negligible. Performance is influenced by model [35], variable [36] and threshold [37,38] selection, among other factors

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.