Predicting climate-induced range shifts: model differences and model reliability

被引:277
作者
Lawler, Joshua J.
White, Denis
Neilson, Ronald P.
Blaustein, Andrew R.
机构
[1] US EPA, Corvallis, OR 97333 USA
[2] Oregon State Univ, Dept Zool, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
[3] US Forest Serv, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
关键词
climate change; climate-envelope models; extinction; geographic range; model averaging; model prediction; random forest predictors;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01191.x
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Predicted changes in the global climate are likely to cause large shifts in the geographic ranges of many plant and animal species. To date, predictions of future range shifts have relied on a variety of modeling approaches with different levels of model accuracy. Using a common data set, we investigated the potential implications of alternative modeling approaches for conclusions about future range shifts and extinctions. Our common data set entailed the current ranges of 100 randomly selected mammal species found in the western hemisphere. Using these range maps, we compared six methods for modeling predicted future ranges. Predicted future distributions differed markedly across the alternative modeling approaches, which in turn resulted in estimates of extinction rates that ranged between 0% and 7%, depending on which model was used. Random forest predictors, a model-averaging approach, consistently outperformed the other techniques (correctly predicting > 99% of current absences and 86% of current presences). We conclude that the types of models used in a study can have dramatic effects on predicted range shifts and extinction rates; and that model-averaging approaches appear to have the greatest potential for predicting range shifts in the face of climate change.
引用
收藏
页码:1568 / 1584
页数:17
相关论文
共 66 条
[1]   Evaluating predictive models of species' distributions: criteria for selecting optimal models [J].
Anderson, RP ;
Lew, D ;
Peterson, AT .
ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2003, 162 (03) :211-232
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2003, DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION
[3]   Validation of species-climate impact models under climate change [J].
Araújo, MB ;
Pearson, RG ;
Thuiller, W ;
Erhard, M .
GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 2005, 11 (09) :1504-1513
[4]   Would climate change drive species out of reserves?: An assessment of existing reserve-selection methods [J].
Araújo, MB ;
Cabeza, M ;
Thuiller, W ;
Hannah, L ;
Williams, PH .
GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 2004, 10 (09) :1618-1626
[5]   Climate change effects on vegetation distribution and carbon budget in the United States [J].
Bachelet, D ;
Neilson, RP ;
Lenihan, JM ;
Drapek, RJ .
ECOSYSTEMS, 2001, 4 (03) :164-185
[6]   Simulating past and future dynamics of natural ecosystems in the United States [J].
Bachelet, D ;
Neilson, RP ;
Hickler, T ;
Drapek, RJ ;
Lenihan, JM ;
Sykes, MT ;
Smith, B ;
Sitch, S ;
Thonicke, K .
GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES, 2003, 17 (02)
[7]   SmcHD1, containing a structural-maintenance-of-chromosomes hinge domain, has a critical role in X inactivation [J].
Blewitt, Marnie E. ;
Gendrel, Anne-Valerie ;
Pang, Zhenyi ;
Sparrow, Duncan B. ;
Whitelaw, Nadia ;
Craig, Jeffrey M. ;
Apedaile, Anwyn ;
Hilton, Douglas J. ;
Dunwoodie, Sally L. ;
Brockdorff, Neil ;
Kay, Graham F. ;
Whitelaw, Emma .
NATURE GENETICS, 2008, 40 (05) :663-669
[8]   Random forests [J].
Breiman, L .
MACHINE LEARNING, 2001, 45 (01) :5-32
[9]  
Chambers J.M., 1991, Statistical Models in S
[10]   Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to CO2 and climate change:: results from six dynamic global vegetation models [J].
Cramer, W ;
Bondeau, A ;
Woodward, FI ;
Prentice, IC ;
Betts, RA ;
Brovkin, V ;
Cox, PM ;
Fisher, V ;
Foley, JA ;
Friend, AD ;
Kucharik, C ;
Lomas, MR ;
Ramankutty, N ;
Sitch, S ;
Smith, B ;
White, A ;
Young-Molling, C .
GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 2001, 7 (04) :357-373