Search for: All records

We examine the evidence linking species’ traits to contemporary range shifts and find they are poor predictors of range shifts that have occurred over decades to a century. We then discuss reasons for the poor performance of traits for describing interspecific variation in range shifts from two perspectives: ( a) factors associated with species’ traits that degrade range-shift signals stemming from the measures used for species’ traits, traits that are typically not analyzed, and the influence of phylogeny on range-shift potential and ( b) issues in quantifying range shifts and relating them to species’ traits due to imperfect detection of species, differences in the responses of altitudinal and latitudinal ranges, and emphasis on testing linear relationships between traits and range shifts instead of nonlinear responses. Improving trait-based approaches requires a recognition that traits within individuals interact in unexpected ways and that different combinations of traits may be functionally equivalent. 

Correlative species distribution models are widely used to quantify past shifts in ranges or communities, and to predict future outcomes under ongoing global change. Practitioners confront a wide range of potentially plausible models for ecological dynamics, but most specific applications only consider a narrow set. Here, we clarify that certain model structures can embed restrictive assumptions about key sources of forecast uncertainty into an analysis. To evaluate forecast uncertainties and our ability to explain community change, we fit and compared 39 candidate multi‐ or joint species occupancy models to avian incidence data collected at 320 sites across California during the early 20th century and resurveyed a century later. We found massive (>20,000 LOOIC) differences in within‐time information criterion across models. Poorer fitting models omitting multivariate random effects predicted less variation in species richness changes and smaller contemporary communities, with considerable variation in predicted spatial patterns in richness changes across models. The top models suggested avian environmental associations changed across time, contemporary avian occupancy was influenced by previous site‐specific occupancy states, and that both latent site variables and species associations with these variables also varied over time. Collectively, our results recapitulate that simplified model assumptions not only impact predictive fit but may mask important sources of forecast uncertainty and mischaracterize the current state of system understanding when seeking to describe or project community responses to global change. We recommend that researchers seeking to make long‐term forecasts prioritize characterizing forecast uncertainty over seeking to present a single best guess. To do so reliably, we urge practitioners to employ models capable of characterizing the key sources of forecast uncertainty, where predictors, parameters and random effects may vary over time or further interact with previous occurrence states.

 

Transition zones between biomes, also known as ecotones, are areas of pronounced ecological change. They are primarily maintained by abiotic factors and disturbance regimes that could hinder or promote species range shifts in response to climate change. We evaluated how climate change has affected metacommunity dynamics in two adjacent biomes and across their ecotone by resurveying 106 sites that were originally surveyed for avian diversity in the early 20th century by Joseph Grinnell and colleagues. The Mojave, a warm desert, and the Great Basin, a cold desert, have distinct assemblages and meet along a contiguous, east–west boundary. Both deserts substantially warmed over the past century, but the Mojave dried while the Great Basin became wetter. We examined whether the distinctiveness and composition of desert avifaunas have changed, if species distributions shifted, and how the transition zone impacted turnover patterns. Avifauna change was characterized by (a) reduced occupancy, range contractions, and idiosyncratic species redistributions; (b) degradation of historic community structure, and increased taxonomic and climatic differentiation of the species inhabiting the two deserts; and (c) high levels of turnover at the transition zone but little range expansion of species from the warm, dry Mojave into the cooler, wetter Great Basin. Although both deserts now support more drier and warmer tolerant species, their bird communities still occupy distinct climatological space and differ significantly in climatic composition. Our results suggest a persistent transition zone between biomes contributes to limiting the redistribution of birds, and highlight the importance of understanding how transition zone dynamics impact responses to climate change.

 

Climate and land‐use changes are thought to be the greatest threats to biodiversity, but few studies have directly measured their simultaneous impacts on species distributions. We used a unique historic resource—early 20th‐century bird surveys conducted by Joseph Grinnell and colleagues—paired with contemporary resurveys a century later to examine changes in bird distributions in California's Central Valley, one of the most intensively modified agricultural zones in the world and a region of heterogeneous climate change. We analyzed species‐ and community‐level occupancy using multispecies occupancy models that explicitly accounted for imperfect detection probability, and developed a novel, simulation‐based method to compare the relative influences of climate and land‐use covariates on site‐level species richness and beta diversity (measured by Jaccard similarity). Surprisingly, we show that mean occupancy, species richness and between‐site similarity have remained remarkably stable over the past century. Stability in community‐level metrics masked substantial changes in species composition; occupancy declines of some species were equally matched by increases in others, predominantly species with generalist or human‐associated habitat preferences. Bird occupancy, richness and diversity within each era were driven most strongly by water availability (precipitation and percent water cover), indicating that both climate and land‐use are important drivers of species distributions. Water availability had much stronger effects than temperature, urbanization and agricultural cover, which are typically thought to drive biodiversity decline.