Incorporating uncertainty in predictive species distribution modelling

Motivated by the need to solve ecological problems (climate change, habitat fragmentation and biological invasions), there has been increasing interest in species distribution models (SDMs). Predictions from these models inform conservation policy, invasive species management and disease-control measures. However, predictions are subject to uncertainty, the degree and source of which is often unrecognized. Here, we review the SDM literature in the context of uncertainty, focusing on three main classes of SDM: niche-based models, demographic models and process-based models. We identify sources of uncertainty for each class and discuss how uncertainty can be minimized or included in the modelling process to give realistic measures of confidence around predictions. Because this has typically not been performed, we conclude that uncertainty in SDMs has often been underestimated and a false precision assigned to predictions of geographical distribution. We identify areas where development of new statistical tools will improve predictions from distribution models, notably the development of hierarchical models that link different types of distribution model and their attendant uncertainties across spatial scales. Finally, we discuss the need to develop more defensible methods for assessing predictive performance, quantifying model goodness-of-fit and for assessing the significance of model covariates.     

Integrating species distribution modelling into decision-making to inform conservation actions

Species distribution models (SDMs) have been widely tagged as valuable tools in a variety of conservation assessments to address pressing conservation problems. However, these solutions could be hampered by difficulties to overcome the knowledge-action boundary between conservation and modelling practice. These difficulties have been well typified in the ecological modelling sphere, but a specific conceptual framework on how to bridge this gap is still lacking. This work reports successful examples on how to use SDMs to identify the most favourable habitats for implementing conservation management actions. We use these examples to discuss about the three main topics that deserve special attention to help enhance information flow between practitioners and modellers: the decision context, the modelling framework and the spatial products. Finally, we suggest some practical solutions to improve applications of effective conservation action on the ground. We emphasize the importance of matching modelling goals and decision targets by a close collaboration of modellers with decision makers and species experts. Moreover, we highlight the key role of clear and useful spatial products to provide relevant and timely feedback to increase understanding and promote utilisation by conservation practitioners, and to inform and involve targeted audiences.     

Forecasting species range dynamics with process‐explicit models: matching methods to applications

Knowing where species occur is fundamental to many ecological and environmental applications. Species distribution models (SDMs) are typically based on correlations between species occurrence data and environmental predictors, with ecological processes captured only implicitly. However, there is a growing interest in approaches that explicitly model processes such as physiology, dispersal, demography and biotic interactions. These models are believed to offer more robust predictions, particularly when extrapolating to novel conditions. Many process–explicit approaches are now available, but it is not clear how we can best draw on this expanded modelling toolbox to address ecological problems and inform management decisions. Here, we review a range of process–explicit models to determine their strengths and limitations, as well as their current use. Focusing on four common applications of SDMs – regulatory planning, extinction risk, climate refugia and invasive species – we then explore which models best meet management needs. We identify barriers to more widespread and effective use of process‐explicit models and outline how these might be overcome. As well as technical and data challenges, there is a pressing need for more thorough evaluation of model predictions to guide investment in method development and ensure the promise of these new approaches is fully realised.     

Using Species Distribution Models For Fungi

Species distribution models (SDMs) are an emerging tool in the study of fungi, and their use is expanding across species and research topics. To summarise progress to date and to highlight important considerations for future users, we review 283 studies that apply SDMs to fungi. We found that macrofungi, lichens, and pathogenic microfungi are most often studied. While many studies only aim to model species response to environmental covariates, the use of SDMs for explicitly predicting fungal occurrence in space and time is growing. Many studies collect fungal occurrence data, but the use of pre-collected records from reference collections and citizen science programs is increasing. Challenges of applying SDMs to fungi include detection and sampling biases, and uncertainties in identification and taxonomy. Further, finding environmental covariates at appropriate spatial and temporal scales is important, as fungi can respond to fine-scale environmental patterns. Fine-scale covariate data can be difficult to gather across space, but we show remote-sensing measurements are viable for fungi SDMs. For those fungi interacting with host species, host information is also important, and can be used as covariates in SDMs. We also highlight that competition among fungi, and dispersal, can affect observed distributions, with the latter particularly prominent for invasive fungi. We show how one can account for these processes in models, when suitable data are available. Finally, we note that environmental DNA records create new opportunities and challenges for future modelling efforts, and discuss the difficulties in predicting invasions and climate change impacts. The application of SDMs to fungi has already provided interesting lessons on how to adapt modelling tools for specific questions, and fungi will continue to be relevant test subjects for further technical development of SDMs.     

Testing projected wild bee distributions in agricultural habitats: predictive power depends on species traits and habitat type

Species distribution models (SDM) are increasingly used to understand the factors that regulate variation in biodiversity patterns and to help plan conservation strategies. However, these models are rarely validated with independently collected data and it is unclear whether SDM performance is maintained across distinct habitats and for species with different functional traits. Highly mobile species, such as bees, can be particularly challenging to model. Here, we use independent sets of occurrence data collected systematically in several agricultural habitats to test how the predictive performance of SDMs for wild bee species depends on species traits, habitat type, and sampling technique. We used a species distribution modeling approach parametrized for the Netherlands, with presence records from 1990 to 2010 for 193 Dutch wild bees. For each species, we built a Maxent model based on 13 climate and landscape variables. We tested the predictive performance of the SDMs with independent datasets collected from orchards and arable fields across the Netherlands from 2010 to 2013, using transect surveys or pan traps. Model predictive performance depended on species traits and habitat type. Occurrence of bee species specialized in habitat and diet was better predicted than generalist bees. Predictions of habitat suitability were also more precise for habitats that are temporally more stable (orchards) than for habitats that suffer regular alterations (arable), particularly for small, solitary bees. As a conservation tool, SDMs are best suited to modeling rarer, specialist species than more generalist and will work best in long‐term stable habitats. The variability of complex, short‐term habitats is difficult to capture in such models and historical land use generally has low thematic resolution. To improve SDMs’ usefulness, models require explanatory variables and collection data that include detailed landscape characteristics, for example, variability of crops and flower availability. Additionally, testing SDMs with field surveys should involve multiple collection techniques.     

物种分布模型在海洋潜在生境预测的应用研究进展

海洋生物的栖息分布与环境要素的关联性一直是海洋生态学研究的热点之一.近年来,物种分布模型被广泛应用于预测海洋物种分布、潜在适宜性生境评价等研究,为保护海洋生物多样性、防治外来物种入侵及制定渔业管理措施等提供了一条有效途径.物种分布模型主要包括生境适宜性指数模型、机理模型和统计模型.本文对物种分布模型的理论基础进行了归纳和总结,回顾了物种分布模型在预测海洋物种潜在地理分布研究中的开发与应用,重点介绍了不同类型统计模型在海洋物种潜在分布预测中的研究实例.比较各种选取变量和模型验证方法,认为赤池信息准则对于选取模型变量具有优势,Kappa系数和受试者操作特征曲线下面积在验证模型精度中应用最广泛.阐述了物种分布模型存在的问题及未来发展趋势,随着海洋生物生理机制研究的进一步深入,机理模型将是今后物种分布模型发展的重点.     

Spatial conservation priorities are highly sensitive to choice of biodiversity surrogates and species distribution model type

Pressure to conserve biodiversity with limited resources has led to increasing use of species distribution models (SDMs) for spatial conservation prioritization. Published spatial prioritization exercises often focus on well‐studied groups, with data compiled from on‐line databases of ad‐hoc collections. Conservation plans generally aim to protect all components of biodiversity, and it is implied that the species used in prioritization act as surrogates. Here, we assess the sensitivity of spatial priorities to model and surrogate choice using a case study from a fragmented agricultural area of south eastern Australia that is poorly represented in the national reserve system. We model the distributions of 30 species of bird, microbat and bee using two types of SDM; generalised linear models based on systematic surveys that yield presence and absence observations, and MaxEnt models based on biodiversity database records. Eight prioritization scenarios were tested using Zonation software, and were based on either the presence–background or presence–absence SDMs and combinations of surrogacy among the three taxa. We found low correlations between SDMs generated for the same species using different modelling frameworks (μ = 0.18, n = 26). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) estimates generated by MaxEnt were optimistic; on average 1.36 times higher than when tested against the systematic survey data. Conservation priorities were sensitive to the choice of surrogate and type of data used to fit SDMs, and though bats and birds formed moderately good surrogates for each other, there was less compelling evidence of surrogacy for bees. Because valid surrogacy is unlikely with most existing data sets, investment in high quality data for less‐surveyed groups prior to planning should still be a priority. If this is not possible, then it is advisable to analyse the sensitivity of conservation plans to the assumed surrogacy and quality of data available.     

Incorporating spatial autocorrelation into species distribution models alters forecasts of climate‐mediated range shifts

Species distribution models (SDMs) are widely used to forecast changes in the spatial distributions of species and communities in response to climate change. However, spatial autocorrelation (SA) is rarely accounted for in these models, despite its ubiquity in broad‐scale ecological data. While spatial autocorrelation in model residuals is known to result in biased parameter estimates and the inflation of type I errors, the influence of unmodeled SA on species' range forecasts is poorly understood. Here we quantify how accounting for SA in SDMs influences the magnitude of range shift forecasts produced by SDMs for multiple climate change scenarios. SDMs were fitted to simulated data with a known autocorrelation structure, and to field observations of three mangrove communities from northern Australia displaying strong spatial autocorrelation. Three modeling approaches were implemented: environment‐only models (most frequently applied in species' range forecasts), and two approaches that incorporate SA; autologistic models and residuals autocovariate (RAC) models. Differences in forecasts among modeling approaches and climate scenarios were quantified. While all model predictions at the current time closely matched that of the actual current distribution of the mangrove communities, under the climate change scenarios environment‐only models forecast substantially greater range shifts than models incorporating SA. Furthermore, the magnitude of these differences intensified with increasing increments of climate change across the scenarios. When models do not account for SA, forecasts of species' range shifts indicate more extreme impacts of climate change, compared to models that explicitly account for SA. Therefore, where biological or population processes induce substantial autocorrelation in the distribution of organisms, and this is not modeled, model predictions will be inaccurate. These results have global importance for conservation efforts as inaccurate forecasts lead to ineffective prioritization of conservation activities and potentially to avoidable species extinctions.     

Disentangling drivers of spatial autocorrelation in species distribution models

Species distribution models (SDMs) are frequently used to understand the influence of site properties on species occurrence. For robust model inference, SDMs need to account for the spatial autocorrelation of virtually all species occurrence data. Current methods do not routinely distinguish between extrinsic and intrinsic drivers of spatial autocorrelation, although these may have different implications for conservation. Here, we present and test a method that disentangles extrinsic and intrinsic drivers of spatial autocorrelation using repeated observations of a species. We focus on unknown habitat characteristics and conspecific interactions as extrinsic and intrinsic drivers, respectively. We model the former with spatially correlated random effects and the latter with an autocovariate, such that the spatially correlated random effects are constant across the repeated observations whereas the autocovariate may change. We tested the performance of our model on virtual species data and applied it to observations of the corncrake Crex crex in the Netherlands. Applying our model to virtual species data revealed that it was well able to distinguish between the two different drivers of spatial autocorrelation, outperforming models with no or a single component for spatial autocorrelation. This finding was independent of the direction of the conspecific interactions (i.e. conspecific attraction versus competitive exclusion). The simulations confirmed that the ability of our model to disentangle both drivers of autocorrelation depends on repeated observations. In the case study, we discovered that the corncrake has a stronger response to habitat characteristics compared to a model that did not include spatially correlated random effects, whereas conspecific interactions appeared to be less important. This implies that future conservation efforts should primarily focus on maximizing habitat availability. Our study shows how to systematically disentangle extrinsic and intrinsic drivers of spatial autocorrelation. The method we propose can help to correctly identify the main drivers of species distributions.     

种间作用对物种分布模拟的影响及建模方法

物种分布模型(SDMs)通过量化物种分布和环境变量之间的关系,并将其外推到未知的景观单元,模拟、预测地理空间中生物的潜在分布,是生态学、生物地理学、保护生物学等研究领域的重要工具.然而,目前物种分布模型主要采用非生物因素作为预测变量,由于数据量化和建模表达困难,生物因素特别是种间作用在物种分布模型中常被忽略,将种间作用...     

Pushing the limits in marine species distribution modelling: lessons from the land present challenges and opportunities

Aim Species distribution models (SDMs) have been used to address a wide range of theoretical and applied questions in the terrestrial realm, but marine‐based applications remain relatively scarce. In this review, we consider how conceptual and practical issues associated with terrestrial SDMs apply to a range of marine organisms and highlight the challenges relevant to improving marine SDMs. Location We include studies from both marine and terrestrial systems that encompass many geographic locations around the globe. Methods We first performed a literature search and analysis of marine and terrestrial SDMs in ISI Web of Science to assess trends and applications. Using knowledge from terrestrial applications, we critically evaluate the application of SDMs in marine systems in the context of ecological factors (dispersal, species interactions, aggregation and ontogenetic shifts) and practical considerations (data quality, alternative modelling approaches and model validation) that facilitate or create difficulties for model application. Results The relative importance of ecological factors to be considered when applying SDMs varies among terrestrial and marine organisms. Correctly incorporating dispersal is frequently considered an important issue for terrestrial models, but because there is greater potential for dispersal in the ocean, it is often less of a concern in marine SDMs. By contrast, ontogenetic shifts and feeding have received little attention in terrestrial SDM applications, but these factors are important to many marine SDMs. Opportunities also exist for applying more advanced SDM approaches in the marine realm, including mechanistic ecophysiological models, where water balance and heat transfer equations are simpler for some marine organisms relative to their terrestrial counterparts. Main conclusions SDMs have generally been under‐utilized in the marine realm relative to terrestrial applications. Correlative SDM methods should be tested on a range of marine organisms, and we suggest further development of methods that address ontogenetic shifts and feeding interactions. We anticipate developments in, and cross‐fertilization between, coupled correlative and process‐based SDMs, mechanistic eco‐physiological SDMs, and spatial population dynamic models for climate change and species invasion applications in particular. Comparisons of the outputs of different model types will provide insight that is useful for improved spatial management of marine species.     

Trade-offs in covariate selection for species distribution models: a methodological comparison

Species distribution models (SDMs) are a common approach to describing species’ space-use and spatially-explicit abundance. With a myriad of model types, methods and parameterization options available, it is challenging to make informed decisions about how to build robust SDMs appropriate for a given purpose. One key component of SDM development is the appropriate parameterization of covariates, such as the inclusion of covariates that reflect underlying processes (e.g. abiotic and biotic covariates) and covariates that act as proxies for unobserved processes (e.g. space and time covariates). It is unclear how different SDMs apportion variance among a suite of covariates, and how parameterization decisions influence model accuracy and performance. To examine trade-offs in covariation parameterization in SDMs, we explore the attribution of spatiotemporal and environmental variation across a suite of SDMs. We first used simulated species distributions with known environmental preferences to compare three types of SDM: a machine learning model (boosted regression tree), a semi-parametric model (generalized additive model) and a spatiotemporal mixed-effects model (vector autoregressive spatiotemporal model, VAST). We then applied the same comparative framework to a case study with three fish species (arrowtooth flounder, pacific cod and walleye pollock) in the eastern Bering Sea, USA. Model type and covariate parameterization both had significant effects on model accuracy and performance. We found that including either spatiotemporal or environmental covariates typically reproduced patterns of species distribution and abundance across the three models tested, but model accuracy and performance was maximized when including both spatiotemporal and environmental covariates in the same model framework. Our results reveal trade-offs in the current generation of SDM tools between accurately estimating species abundance, accurately estimating spatial patterns, and accurately quantifying underlying species–environment relationships. These comparisons between model types and parameterization options can help SDM users better understand sources of model bias and estimate error.     

Is my species distribution model fit for purpose? Matching data and models to applications

Species distribution models (SDMs) are used to inform a range of ecological, biogeographical and conservation applications. However, users often underestimate the strong links between data type, model output and suitability for end‐use. We synthesize current knowledge and provide a simple framework that summarizes how interactions between data type and the sampling process (i.e. imperfect detection and sampling bias) determine the quantity that is estimated by a SDM. We then draw upon the published literature and simulations to illustrate and evaluate the information needs of the most common ecological, biogeographical and conservation applications of SDM outputs. We find that, while predictions of models fitted to the most commonly available observational data (presence records) suffice for some applications, others require estimates of occurrence probabilities, which are unattainable without reliable absence records. Our literature review and simulations reveal that, while converting continuous SDM outputs into categories of assumed presence or absence is common practice, it is seldom clearly justified by the application's objective and it usually degrades inference. Matching SDMs to the needs of particular applications is critical to avoid poor scientific inference and management outcomes. This paper aims to help modellers and users assess whether their intended SDM outputs are indeed fit for purpose.     

Mechanistic variables can enhance predictive models of endotherm distributions: the American pika under current,past, and future climates

How climate constrains species’ distributions through time and space is an important question in the context of conservation planning for climate change. Despite increasing awareness of the need to incorporate mechanism into species distribution models (SDMs), mechanistic modeling of endotherm distributions remains limited in this literature. Using the American pika (Ochotona princeps) as an example, we present a framework whereby mechanism can be incorporated into endotherm SDMs. Pika distribution has repeatedly been found to be constrained by warm temperatures, so we used Niche Mapper, a mechanistic heat‐balance model, to convert macroclimate data to pika‐specific surface activity time in summer across the western United States. We then explored the difference between using a macroclimate predictor (summer temperature) and using a mechanistic predictor (predicted surface activity time) in SDMs. Both approaches accurately predicted pika presences in current and past climate regimes. However, the activity models predicted 8–19% less habitat loss in response to annual temperature increases of ~3–5 °C predicted in the region by 2070, suggesting that pikas may be able to buffer some climate change effects through behavioral thermoregulation that can be captured by mechanistic modeling. Incorporating mechanism added value to the modeling by providing increased confidence in areas where different modeling approaches agreed and providing a range of outcomes in areas of disagreement. It also provided a more proximate variable relating animal distribution to climate, allowing investigations into how unique habitat characteristics and intraspecific phenotypic variation may allow pikas to exist in areas outside those predicted by generic SDMs. Only a small number of easily obtainable data are required to parameterize this mechanistic model for any endotherm, and its use can improve SDM predictions by explicitly modeling a widely applicable direct physiological effect: climate‐imposed restrictions on activity. This more complete understanding is necessary to inform climate adaptation actions, management strategies, and conservation plans.     

The Combined Use of Correlative and Mechanistic Species Distribution Models Benefits Low Conservation Status Species

Species can respond to climate change by tracking appropriate environmental conditions in space, resulting in a range shift. Species Distribution Models (SDMs) can help forecast such range shift responses. For few species, both correlative and mechanistic SDMs were built, but allis shad (Alosa alosa), an endangered anadromous fish species, is one of them. The main purpose of this study was to provide a framework for joint analyses of correlative and mechanistic SDMs projections in order to strengthen conservation measures for species of conservation concern. Guidelines for joint representation and subsequent interpretation of models outputs were defined and applied. The present joint analysis was based on the novel mechanistic model GR3D (Global Repositioning Dynamics of Diadromous fish Distribution) which was parameterized on allis shad and then used to predict its future distribution along the European Atlantic coast under different climate change scenarios (RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5). We then used a correlative SDM for this species to forecast its distribution across the same geographic area and under the same climate change scenarios. First, projections from correlative and mechanistic models provided congruent trends in probability of habitat suitability and population dynamics. This agreement was preferentially interpreted as referring to the species vulnerability to climate change. Climate change could not be accordingly listed as a major threat for allis shad. The congruence in predicted range limits between SDMs projections was the next point of interest. The difference, when noticed, required to deepen our understanding of the niche modelled by each approach. In this respect, the relative position of the northern range limit between the two methods strongly suggested here that a key biological process related to intraspecific variability was potentially lacking in the mechanistic SDM. Based on our knowledge, we hypothesized that local adaptations to cold temperatures deserved more attention in terms of modelling, but further in conservation planning as well.     

Incorporating intraspecific variation into species distribution models improves distribution predictions,but cannot predict species traits for a wide-spread plant species

The most common approach to predicting how species ranges and ecological functions will shift with climate change is to construct correlative species distribution models (SDMs). These models use a species’ climatic distribution to determine currently suitable areas for the species and project its potential distribution under future climate scenarios. A core, rarely tested, assumption of SDMs is that all populations will respond equivalently to climate. Few studies have examined this assumption, and those that have rarely dissect the reasons for intraspecific differences. Focusing on the arctic-alpine cushion plant Silene acaulis, we compared predictive accuracy from SDMs constructed using the species’ full global distribution with composite predictions from separate SDMs constructed using subpopulations defined either by genetic or habitat differences. This is one of the first studies to compare multiple ways of constructing intraspecific-level SDMs with a species-level SDM. We also examine the contested relationship between relative probability of occurrence and species performance or ecological function, testing if SDM output can predict individual performance (plant size) and biotic interactions (facilitation). We found that both genetic- and habitat-informed SDMs are considerably more accurate than a species-level SDM, and that the genetic model substantially differs from and outperforms the habitat model. While SDMs have been used to infer population performance and possibly even biotic interactions, in our system these relationships were extremely weak. Our results indicate that individual subpopulations may respond differently to climate, although we discuss and explore several alternative explanations for the superior performance of intraspecific-level SDMs. We emphasize the need to carefully examine how to best define intraspecific-level SDMs as well as how potential genetic, environmental, or sampling variation within species ranges can critically affect SDM predictions. We urge caution in inferring population performance or biotic interactions from SDM predictions, as these often-assumed relationships are not supported in our study.     

Livestock-driven land use change to model species distributions: Egyptian vulture as a case study

Species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly used to predict species ranges and their shifts under future scenarios of global environmental change (GEC). SDMs are thus incorporating key drivers of GEC (e.g. climate, land use) to improve predictions of species’ habitat suitability (i.e. as an indicator of species occurrence). Yet, most SDMs incorporating land use only consider dominant land cover types, largely ignoring other key aspects of land use such as land management intensity and livestock. We developed SDMs including main land use components (i.e. land cover, livestock and its management intensity) to assess their relative importance in shaping habitat suitability for the Egyptian vulture, an endangered raptor linked to livestock presence. We modelled current and future (2020 and 2050) habitat suitability for this vulture using an organism-centred approach. This allowed us to account for basic species’ habitat needs (i.e. nesting cliff) while gaining insight into our variables of interest (i.e. livestock and land cover). Once nest-site requirements were fulfilled, land use variables (i.e. openland and sheep and goat density) were the main factors determining species’ habitat suitability. Current suitable area could decrease by up to 6.81% by 2050 under scenarios with rapid economic growth but no focus on environmental conservation and rural development. Local solutions to environmental sustainability and rural development could double current habitat suitability by 2050. Land use is expected to play a key role in determining Egyptian vulture's distribution through land cover change but also through changes in livestock management (i.e. species and stocking density). Change in stocking densities (sheep and goats/km²) becomes thus an indicator of habitat suitability for this vulture in our study area. Abandonment of agro-pastoral practises (i.e. below ∼15–20 sheep and goats/km²) will negatively influence the species distribution. Nonetheless, livestock densities above these values will not further increase habitat suitability. Given the widespread impacts of livestock on ecosystems, the role of livestock and its management intensity in SDMs for other (non-livestock-related) species should be further explored.     

To Be Or Not to Be? Variable selection can change the projected fate of a threatened species under future climate

Species distribution models (SDMs) are commonly used to project future changes in the geographic ranges of species, to estimate extinction rates and to plan biodiversity conservation. However, these models can produce a range of results depending on how they are parameterized, and over‐reliance on a single model may lead to overconfidence in maps of future distributions. The choice of predictor variable can have a greater influence on projected future habitat than the range of climate models used. We demonstrate this in the case of the Ptunarra Brown Butterfly, a species listed as vulnerable in Tasmania, Australia. We use the Maxent model to develop future projections for this species based on three variable sets; all 35 commonly used so‐called ‘bioclimatic’ variables, a subset of these based on expert knowledge, and a set of monthly climate variables relevant to the species’ primary activity period. We used a dynamically downscaled regional climate model based on three global climate models. Depending on the choice of variable set, the species is projected either to experience very little contraction of habitat or to come close to extinction by the end of the century due to lack of suitable climate. The different conclusions could have important consequences for conservation planning and management, including the perceived viability of habitat restoration. The output of SDMs should therefore be used to define the range of possible trajectories a species may be on, and ongoing monitoring used to inform management as changes occur.     

Projecting climate change impacts on species distributions in megadiverse South African Cape and Southwest Australian Floristic Regions: Opportunities and challenges

Increasing evidence shows that anthropogenic climate change is affecting biodiversity. Reducing or stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions may slow global warming, but past emissions will continue to contribute to further unavoidable warming for more than a century. With obvious signs of difficulties in achieving effective mitigation worldwide in the short term at least, sound scientific predictions of future impacts on biodiversity will be required to guide conservation planning and adaptation. This is especially true in Mediterranean type ecosystems that are projected to be among the most significantly affected by anthropogenic climate change, and show the highest levels of confidence in rainfall projections. Multiple methods are available for projecting the consequences of climate change on the main unit of interest – the species – with each method having strengths and weaknesses. Species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly applied for forecasting climate change impacts on species geographic ranges. Aggregation of models for different species allows inferences of impacts on biodiversity, though excluding the effects of species interactions. The modelling approach is based on several further assumptions and projections and should be treated cautiously. In the absence of comparable approaches that address large numbers of species, SDMs remain valuable in estimating the vulnerability of species. In this review we discuss the application of SDMs in predicting the impacts of climate change on biodiversity with special reference to the species‐rich South West Australian Floristic Region and South African Cape Floristic Region. We discuss the advantages and challenges in applying SDMs in biodiverse regions with high levels of endemicity, and how a similar biogeographical history in both regions may assist us in understanding their vulnerability to climate change. We suggest how the process of predicting the impacts of climate change on biodiversity with SDMs can be improved and emphasize the role of field monitoring and experiments in validating the predictions of SDMs.