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.     

Poor Transferability of Species Distribution Models for a Pelagic Predator,the Grey Petrel,Indicates Contrasting Habitat Preferences across Ocean Basins

Species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly applied in conservation management to predict suitable habitat for poorly known populations. High predictive performance of SDMs is evident in validations performed within the model calibration area (interpolation), but few studies have assessed SDM transferability to novel areas (extrapolation), particularly across large spatial scales or pelagic ecosystems. We performed rigorous SDM validation tests on distribution data from three populations of a long-ranging marine predator, the grey petrel Procellaria cinerea, to assess model transferability across the Southern Hemisphere (25-65°S). Oceanographic data were combined with tracks of grey petrels from two remote sub-Antarctic islands (Antipodes and Kerguelen) using boosted regression trees to generate three SDMs: one for each island population, and a combined model. The predictive performance of these models was assessed using withheld tracking data from within the model calibration areas (interpolation), and from a third population, Marion Island (extrapolation). Predictive performance was assessed using k-fold cross validation and point biserial correlation. The two population-specific SDMs included the same predictor variables and suggested birds responded to the same broad-scale oceanographic influences. However, all model validation tests, including of the combined model, determined strong interpolation but weak extrapolation capabilities. These results indicate that habitat use reflects both its availability and bird preferences, such that the realized distribution patterns differ for each population. The spatial predictions by the three SDMs were compared with tracking data and fishing effort to demonstrate the conservation pitfalls of extrapolating SDMs outside calibration regions. This exercise revealed that SDM predictions would have led to an underestimate of overlap with fishing effort and potentially misinformed bycatch mitigation efforts. Although SDMs can elucidate potential distribution patterns relative to large-scale climatic and oceanographic conditions, knowledge of local habitat availability and preferences is necessary to understand and successfully predict region-specific realized distribution patterns.     

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.     

Effects of ecohydrological variables on current and future ranges,local suitability patterns,and model accuracy in big sagebrush

Forecasting of species and ecosystem responses to novel conditions, including climate change, is one of the major challenges facing ecologists at the start of the 21st century. Climate change studies based on species distribution models (SDMs) have been criticized because they extend correlational relationships beyond the observed data. Here, we compared conventional climate‐based SDMs against ecohydrological SDMs that include information from process‐based simulations of water balance. We examined the current and future distribution of Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) representing sagebrush ecosystems, which are widespread in semiarid western North America. For each approach, we calculated ensemble models from nine SDM methods and tested accuracy of each SDM with a null distribution. Climatic conditions included current conditions for 1970–1999 and two IPCC projections B1 and A2 for 2070–2099. Ecohydrological conditions were assessed by simulating soil water balance with SOILWAT, a daily time‐step, multiple layer, mechanistic, soil water model. Under current conditions, both climatic and ecohydrological SDM approaches produced comparable sagebrush distributions. Overall, sagebrush distribution is forecasted to decrease, with larger decreases under the A2 than under the B1 scenario and strong decreases in the southern part of the range. Increases were forecasted in the northern parts and at higher elevations. Both SDM approaches produced accurate predictions. However, the ecohydrological SDM approach was slightly less accurate than climatic SDMs (?1% in AUC, ?4% in Kappa and TSS) and predicted a higher number of habitat patches than observed in the input data. Future predictions of ecohydrological SDMs included an increased number of habitat patches whereas climatic SDMs predicted a decrease. This difference is important for understanding landscape‐scale patterns of sagebrush ecosystems and management of sagebrush obligate species for future conditions. Several mechanisms can explain the diverging forecasts; however, we need better insights into the consequences of different datasets for SDMs and how these affect our understanding of future trajectories.     

Using a multi‐model ensemble approach to determine biodiversity hotspots with limited occurrence data in understudied areas: An example using freshwater mussels in México

Species distribution models (SDMs) are an increasingly important tool for conservation particularly for difficult‐to‐study locations and with understudied fauna. Our aims were to (1) use SDMs and ensemble SDMs to predict the distribution of freshwater mussels in the Pánuco River Basin in Central México; (2) determine habitat factors shaping freshwater mussel occurrence; and (3) use predicted occupancy across a range of taxa to identify freshwater mussel biodiversity hotspots to guide conservation and management. In the Pánuco River Basin, we modeled the distributions of 11 freshwater mussel species using an ensemble approach, wherein multiple SDM methodologies were combined to create a single ensemble map of predicted occupancy. A total of 621 species‐specific observations at 87 sites were used to create species‐specific ensembles. These predictive species ensembles were then combined to create local diversity hotspot maps. Precipitation during the warmest quarter, elevation, and mean temperature were consistently the most important discriminatory environmental variables among species, whereas land use had limited influence across all taxa. To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first freshwater mussel‐focused research to use an ensemble approach to determine species distribution and predict biodiversity hotspots. Our study can be used to guide not only current conservation efforts but also prioritize areas for future conservation and study.     

Microclimate species distribution models estimate lower levels of climate-related habitat loss for salamanders

Species distribution models (SDMs) largely rely on free-air temperatures at coarse spatial resolutions to predict habitat suitability, potentially overlooking important microhabitat. Integrating microclimate data into SDMs may improve predictions of organismal responses to climate change and support targeting of conservation assets at biologically relevant scales, especially for small, dispersal-limited species vulnerable to climate-change-induced range loss. We integrated microclimate data that account for the buffering effects of forest vegetation into SDMs at a very high spatial resolution (3 m²) for three plethodontid salamander species in Great Smoky Mountains National Park (North Carolina and Tennessee). Microclimate SDMs were used to characterize potential changes to future plethodontid habitat, including habitat suitability and habitat spatial patterns. Additionally, we evaluated spatial discrepancies between predictions of habitat suitability developed with microclimate and coarse-resolution, free-air climate data. Microclimate SDMs indicated substantial losses to plethodontid ranges and highly suitable habitat by mid-century, but at much more conservative levels than coarse-resolution models. Coarse-resolution SDMs generally estimated higher mid-century losses to plethodontid habitat compared to microclimate models and consistently undervalued areas containing highly suitable microhabitat. Furthermore, microclimate SDMs revealed potential areas of future gain in highly suitable habitat within current species’ ranges, which may serve as climatic microrefugia. Taken together, this study highlights the need to develop microclimate SDMs that account for vegetation and its biophysical effects on near-surface temperatures. As microclimate datasets become increasingly available across the world, their integration into correlative and mechanistic SDMs will be imperative for accurately estimating organismal responses to climate change and helping environmental managers tasked with spatially prioritizing conservation assets.     

From species distributions to meta‐communities

The extent that biotic interactions and dispersal influence species ranges and diversity patterns across scales remains an open question. Answering this question requires framing an analysis on the frontier between species distribution modelling (SDM), which ignores biotic interactions and dispersal limitation, and community ecology, which provides specific predictions on community and meta‐community structure and resulting diversity patterns such as species richness and functional diversity. Using both empirical and simulated datasets, we tested whether predicted occurrences from fine‐resolution SDMs provide good estimates of community structure and diversity patterns at resolutions ranging from a resolution typical of studies within reserves (250 m) to that typical of a regional biodiversity study (5 km). For both datasets, we show that the imprint of biotic interactions and dispersal limitation quickly vanishes when spatial resolution is reduced, which demonstrates the value of SDMs for tracking the imprint of community assembly processes across scales.     

Testing the utility of species distribution modelling using Random Forests for a species in decline

Habitat suitability estimates derived from species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly used to guide management of threatened species. Poorly estimating species’ ranges can lead to underestimation of threatened status, undervaluing of remaining habitat and misdirection of conservation funding. We aimed to evaluate the utility of a SDM, similar to the models used to inform government regulation of habitat in our study region, in estimating the contemporary distribution of a threatened and declining species. We developed a presence‐only SDM for the endangered New Holland Mouse (Pseudomys novaehollandiae) across Victoria, Australia. We conducted extensive camera trap surveys across model‐predicted and expert‐selected areas to generate an independent data set for use in evaluating the model, determining confidence in absence data from non‐detection sites with occupancy and detectability modelling. We assessed the predictive capacity of the model at thresholds based on (1) sum of sensitivity and specificity (SSS), and (2) the lowest presence threshold (LPT; i.e. the lowest non‐zero model‐predicted habitat suitability value at which we detected the species). We detected P. novaehollandiae at 40 of 472 surveyed sites, with strong support for the species’ probable absence from non‐detection sites. Based on our post hoc optimised SSS threshold of the SDM, 25% of our detection sites were falsely predicted as non‐suitable habitat and 75% of sites predicted as suitable habitat did not contain the species at the time of our survey. One occupied site had a model‐predicted suitability value of zero, and at the LPT, 88% of sites predicted as suitable habitat did not contain the species at the time of our survey. Our findings demonstrate that application of generic SDMs in both regulatory and investment contexts should be tempered by considering their limitations and currency. Further, we recommend engaging species experts in the extrapolation and application of SDM outputs.     

A new method for dealing with residual spatial autocorrelation in species distribution models

Species distribution modelling (SDM) is a widely used tool and has many applications in ecology and conservation biology. Spatial autocorrelation (SAC), a pattern in which observations are related to one another by their geographic distance, is common in georeferenced ecological data. SAC in the residuals of SDMs violates the ‘independent errors’ assumption required to justify the use of statistical models in modelling species’ distributions. The autologistic modelling approach accounts for SAC by including an additional term (the autocovariate) representing the similarity between the value of the response variable at a location and neighbouring locations. However, autologistic models have been found to introduce bias in the estimation of parameters describing the influence of explanatory variables on habitat occupancy. To address this problem we developed an extension to the autologistic approach by calculating the autocovariate on SAC in residuals (the RAC approach). Performance of the new approach was tested on simulated data with a known spatial structure and on strongly autocorrelated mangrove species’ distribution data collected in northern Australia. The RAC approach was implemented as generalized linear models (GLMs) and boosted regression tree (BRT) models. We found that the BRT models with only environmental explanatory variables can account for some SAC, but applying the standard autologistic or RAC approaches further reduced SAC in model residuals and substantially improved model predictive performance. The RAC approach showed stronger inferential performance than the standard autologistic approach, as parameter estimates were more accurate and statistically significant variables were accurately identified. The new RAC approach presented here has the potential to account for spatial autocorrelation while maintaining strong predictive and inferential performance, and can be implemented across a range of modelling approaches.     

Not seeing the forest for the trees: Generalised linear model out-performs random forest in species distribution modelling for Southeast Asian felids

Species Distribution Models (SDMs) are a powerful tool to derive habitat suitability predictions relating species occurrence data with habitat features. Two of the most frequently applied algorithms to model species-habitat relationships are Generalised Linear Models (GLM) and Random Forest (RF). The former is a parametric regression model providing functional models with direct interpretability. The latter is a machine learning non-parametric algorithm, more tolerant than other approaches in its assumptions, which has often been shown to outperform parametric algorithms. Other approaches have been developed to produce robust SDMs, like training data bootstrapping and spatial scale optimisation. Using felid presence-absence data from three study regions in Southeast Asia (mainland, Borneo and Sumatra), we tested the performances of SDMs by implementing four modelling frameworks: GLM and RF with bootstrapped and non-bootstrapped training data. With Mantel and ANOVA tests we explored how the four combinations of algorithms and bootstrapping influenced SDMs and their predictive performances. Additionally, we tested how scale-optimisation responded to species' size, taxonomic associations (species and genus), study area and algorithm. We found that choice of algorithm had strong effect in determining the differences between SDMs' spatial predictions, while bootstrapping had no effect. Additionally, algorithm followed by study area and species, were the main factors driving differences in the spatial scales identified. SDMs trained with GLM showed higher predictive performance, however, ANOVA tests revealed that algorithm had significant effect only in explaining the variance observed in sensitivity and specificity and, when interacting with bootstrapping, in Percent Correctly Classified (PCC). Bootstrapping significantly explained the variance in specificity, PCC and True Skills Statistics (TSS). Our results suggest that there are systematic differences in the scales identified and in the predictions produced by GLM vs. RF, but that neither approach was consistently better than the other. The divergent predictions and inconsistent predictive abilities suggest that analysts should not assume machine learning is inherently superior and should test multiple methods. Our results have strong implications for SDM development, revealing the inconsistencies introduced by the choice of algorithm on scale optimisation, with GLM selecting broader scales than RF.     

Do traits of plant species predict the efficacy of species distribution models for finding new occurrences?

Species distribution models (SDMs) are used to test ecological theory and to direct targeted surveys for species of conservation concern. Several studies have tested for an influence of species traits on the predictive accuracy of SDMs. However, most used the same set of environmental predictors for all species and/or did not use truly independent data to test SDM accuracy. We built eight SDMs for each of 24 plant species of conservation concern, varying the environmental predictors included in each SDM version. We then measured the accuracy of each SDM using independent presence and absence data to calculate area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and true positive rate (TPR). We used generalized linear mixed models to test for a relationship between species traits and SDM accuracy, while accounting for variation in SDM performance that might be introduced by different predictor sets. All traits affected one or both SDM accuracy measures. Species with lighter seeds, animal‐dispersed seeds, and a higher density of occurrences had higher AUC and TPR than other species, all else being equal. Long‐lived woody species had higher AUC than herbaceous species, but lower TPR. These results support the hypothesis that the strength of species–environment correlations is affected by characteristics of species or their geographic distributions. However, because each species has multiple traits, and because AUC and TPR can be affected differently, there is no straightforward way to determine a priori which species will yield useful SDMs based on their traits. Most species yielded at least one useful SDM. Therefore, it is worthwhile to build and test SDMs for the purpose of finding new populations of plant species of conservation concern, regardless of these species’ traits.     

Niche variability and its consequences for species distribution modeling

When species distribution models (SDMs) are used to predict how a species will respond to environmental change, an important assumption is that the environmental niche of the species is conserved over evolutionary time-scales. Empirical studies conducted at ecological time-scales, however, demonstrate that the niche of some species can vary in response to environmental change. We use habitat and locality data of five species of stream fishes collected across seasons to examine the effects of niche variability on the accuracy of projections from Maxent, a popular SDM. We then compare these predictions to those from an alternate method of creating SDM projections in which a transformation of the environmental data to similar scales is applied. The niche of each species varied to some degree in response to seasonal variation in environmental variables, with most species shifting habitat use in response to changes in canopy cover or flow rate. SDMs constructed from the original environmental data accurately predicted the occurrences of one species across all seasons and a subset of seasons for two other species. A similar result was found for SDMs constructed from the transformed environmental data. However, the transformed SDMs produced better models in ten of the 14 total SDMs, as judged by ratios of mean probability values at known presences to mean probability values at all other locations. Niche variability should be an important consideration when using SDMs to predict future distributions of species because of its prevalence among natural populations. The framework we present here may potentially improve these predictions by accounting for such variability.     

Performance tradeoffs in target‐group bias correction for species distribution models

Species distribution models (SDMs) are often calibrated using presence‐only datasets plagued with environmental sampling bias, which leads to a decrease of model accuracy. In order to compensate for this bias, it has been suggested that background data (or pseudoabsences) should represent the area that has been sampled. However, spatially‐explicit knowledge of sampling effort is rarely available. In multi‐species studies, sampling effort has been inferred following the target‐group (TG) approach, where aggregated occurrence of TG species informs the selection of background data. However, little is known about the species‐ specific response to this type of bias correction. The present study aims at evaluating the impacts of sampling bias and bias correction on SDM performance. To this end, we designed a realistic system of sampling bias and virtual species based on 92 terrestrial mammal species occurring in the Mediterranean basin. We manipulated presence and background data selection to calibrate four SDM types. Unbiased (unbiased presence data) and biased (biased presence data) SDMs were calibrated using randomly distributed background data. We used real and TG‐estimated sampling efforts in background selection to correct for sampling bias in presence data. Overall, environmental sampling bias had a deleterious effect on SDM performance. In addition, bias correction improved model accuracy, and especially when based on spatially‐explicit knowledge of sampling effort. However, our results highlight important species‐specific variations in susceptibility to sampling bias, which were largely explained by range size: widely‐distributed species were most vulnerable to sampling bias and bias correction was even detrimental for narrow‐ranging species. Furthermore, spatial discrepancies in SDM predictions suggest that bias correction effectively replaces an underestimation bias with an overestimation bias, particularly in areas of low sampling intensity. Thus, our results call for a better estimation of sampling effort in multispecies system, and cautions the uninformed and automatic application of TG bias correction.     

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.     

Modeling bird species distribution change in fire prone Mediterranean landscapes: incorporating species dispersal and landscape dynamics

Species distribution models (SDMs) have traditionally been founded on the assumption that species distributions are in equilibrium with environmental conditions and that these species–environment relationships can be used to estimate species responses to environmental changes. Insight into the validity of this assumption can be obtained from comparing the performance of correlative species distribution models with more complex hybrid approaches, i.e. correlative and process‐based models that explicitly include ecological processes, thereby accounting for mismatches between habitat suitability and species occupancy patterns. Here we compared the ability of correlative SDMs and hybrid models, which can accommodate non‐equilibrium situations arising from dispersal constraints, to reproduce the distribution dynamics of the ortolan bunting Emberiza hortulana in highly dynamic, early successional, fire driven Mediterranean landscapes. Whereas, habitat availability was derived from a correlative statistical SDM, occupancy was modeled using a hybrid approach combining a grid‐based, spatially‐explicit population model that explicitly included bird dispersal with the correlative model. We compared species occupancy patterns under the equilibrium assumption and different scenarios of species dispersal capabilities. To evaluate the predictive capability of the different models, we used independent species data collected in areas affected to different degree by fires. In accordance with the view that disturbance leads to a disparity between the suitable habitat and the occupancy patterns of the ortolan bunting, our results indicated that hybrid modeling approaches were superior to correlative models in predicting species spatial dynamics. Furthermore, hybrid models that incorporated short dispersal distances were more likely to reproduce the observed changes in ortolan bunting distribution patterns, suggesting that dispersal plays a key role in limiting the colonization of recently burnt areas. We conclude that SDMs used in a dynamic context can be significantly improved by using combined hybrid modeling approaches that explicitly account for interactions between key ecological constraints such as dispersal and habitat suitability that drive species response to environmental changes.     

Uncertainty in predictions of range dynamics: black grouse climbing the Swiss Alps

Empirical species distribution models (SDMs) constitute often the tool of choice for the assessment of rapid climate change effects on species’ vulnerability. Conclusions regarding extinction risks might be misleading, however, because SDMs do not explicitly incorporate dispersal or other demographic processes. Here, we supplement SDMs with a dynamic population model 1) to predict climate‐induced range dynamics for black grouse in Switzerland, 2) to compare direct and indirect measures of extinction risks, and 3) to quantify uncertainty in predictions as well as the sources of that uncertainty. To this end, we linked models of habitat suitability to a spatially explicit, individual‐based model. In an extensive sensitivity analysis, we quantified uncertainty in various model outputs introduced by different SDM algorithms, by different climate scenarios and by demographic model parameters. Potentially suitable habitats were predicted to shift uphill and eastwards. By the end of the 21st century, abrupt habitat losses were predicted in the western Prealps for some climate scenarios. In contrast, population size and occupied area were primarily controlled by currently negative population growth and gradually declined from the beginning of the century across all climate scenarios and SDM algorithms. However, predictions of population dynamic features were highly variable across simulations. Results indicate that inferring extinction probabilities simply from the quantity of suitable habitat may underestimate extinction risks because this may ignore important interactions between life history traits and available habitat. Also, in dynamic range predictions uncertainty in SDM algorithms and climate scenarios can become secondary to uncertainty in dynamic model components. Our study emphasises the need for principal evaluation tools like sensitivity analysis in order to assess uncertainty and robustness in dynamic range predictions. A more direct benefit of such robustness analysis is an improved mechanistic understanding of dynamic species’ responses to climate change.     

Testing whether ensemble modelling is advantageous for maximising predictive performance of species distribution models

Predictive performance is important to many applications of species distribution models (SDMs). The SDM ‘ensemble’ approach, which combines predictions across different modelling methods, is believed to improve predictive performance, and is used in many recent SDM studies. Here, we aim to compare the predictive performance of ensemble species distribution models to that of individual models, using a large presence–absence dataset of eucalypt tree species. To test model performance, we divided our dataset into calibration and evaluation folds using two spatial blocking strategies (checkerboard-pattern and latitudinal slicing). We calibrated and cross-validated all models within the calibration folds, using both repeated random division of data (a common approach) and spatial blocking. Ensembles were built using the software package ‘biomod2’, with standard (‘untuned’) settings. Boosted regression tree (BRT) models were also fitted to the same data, tuned according to published procedures. We then used evaluation folds to compare ensembles against both their component untuned individual models, and against the BRTs. We used area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and log-likelihood for assessing model performance. In all our tests, ensemble models performed well, but not consistently better than their component untuned individual models or tuned BRTs across all tests. Moreover, choosing untuned individual models with best cross-validation performance also yielded good external performance, with blocked cross-validation proving better suited for this choice, in this study, than repeated random cross-validation. The latitudinal slice test was only possible for four species; this showed some individual models, and particularly the tuned one, performing better than ensembles. This study shows no particular benefit to using ensembles over individual tuned models. It also suggests that further robust testing of performance is required for situations where models are used to predict to distant places or environments.     

Intra‐specific variability and plasticity influence potential tree species distributions under climate change

Aim To assess the effect of local adaptation and phenotypic plasticity on the potential distribution of species under future climate changes. Trees may be adapted to specific climatic conditions; however, species range predictions have classically been assessed by species distribution models (SDMs) that do not account for intra‐specific genetic variability and phenotypic plasticity, because SDMs rely on the assumption that species respond homogeneously to climate change across their range, i.e. a species is equally adapted throughout its range, and all species are equally plastic. These assumptions could cause SDMs to exaggerate or underestimate species at risk under future climate change. Location The Iberian Peninsula. Methods Species distributions are predicted by integrating experimental data and modelling techniques. We incorporate plasticity and local adaptation into a SDM by calibrating models of tree survivorship with adaptive traits in provenance trials. Phenotypic plasticity was incorporated by calibrating our model with a climatic index that provides a measure of the differences between sites and provenances. Results We present a new modelling approach that is easy to implement and makes use of existing tree provenance trials to predict species distribution models under global warming. Our results indicate that the incorporation of intra‐population genetic diversity and phenotypic plasticity in SDMs significantly altered their outcome. In comparing species range predictions, the decrease in area occupancy under global warming conditions is smaller when considering our survival–adaptation model than that predicted by a ‘classical SDM’ calibrated with presence–absence data. These differences in survivorship are due to both local adaptation and plasticity. Differences due to the use of experimental data in the model calibration are also expressed in our results: we incorporate a null model that uses survival data from all provenances together. This model always predicts less reduction in area occupancy for both species than the SDM calibrated with presence–absence. Main conclusions We reaffirm the importance of considering adaptive traits when predicting species distributions and avoiding the use of occurrence data as a predictive variable. In light of these recommendations, we advise that existing predictions of future species distributions and their component populations must be reconsidered.     

Genetic trials improve the transfer of Douglas‐fir distribution models across continents

Climate change is likely to result in novel conditions with no analogy to current climate. Therefore, the application of species distribution models (SDMs) based on the correlation between observed species’ occurrence and their environment is questionable and calls for a better understanding of the traits that determine species occurrence. Here, we compared two intraspecific, trait‐based SDMs with occurrence‐based SDMs, all developed from European data, and analyzed their transferability to the native range of Douglas‐fir in North America. With data from 50 provenance trials of Douglas‐fir in central Europe multivariate universal response functions (URFs) were developed for two functional traits (dominant tree height and basal area) which are good indicators of growth and vitality under given environmental conditions. These trials included 290 North American provenances of Douglas‐fir. The URFs combine genetic effects i.e. the climate of provenance origin and environmental effects, i.e. the climate of planting locations into an integrated model to predict the respective functional trait from climate data. The URFs were applied as SDMs (URF‐SDMs) by converting growth performances into occurrence. For comparison, an ensemble occurrence‐based SDM was developed and block cross validated with the BIOMOD2 modeling platform utilizing the observed occurrence of Douglas‐fir in Europe. The two trait based SDMs and the occurrence‐based SDM, all calibrated with data from Europe, were applied to predict the known distribution of Douglas‐fir in its introduced and native range in Europe and North America. Both models performed well within their calibration range in Europe, but model transfer to its native range in North America was superior in case of the URF‐SDMs showing similar predictive power as SDMs developed in North America itself. The high transferability of the URF‐SDMs is a testimony of their applicability under novel climatic conditions highlighting the role of intraspecific trait variation for adaptation planning in climate change.