Modeling plant species distributions under future climates: How fine scale do climate projections need to be?

Janet Franklin, Frank W. Davis, Makihiko Ikegami, Alexandra D. Syphard, Lorraine E. Flint, Alan L. Flint, Lee Hannah

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

185 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Recent studies suggest that species distribution models (SDMs) based on fine-scale climate data may provide markedly different estimates of climate-change impacts than coarse-scale models. However, these studies disagree in their conclusions of how scale influences projected species distributions. In rugged terrain, coarse-scale climate grids may not capture topographically controlled climate variation at the scale that constitutes microhabitat or refugia for some species. Although finer scale data are therefore considered to better reflect climatic conditions experienced by species, there have been few formal analyses of how modeled distributions differ with scale. We modeled distributions for 52 plant species endemic to the California Floristic Province of different life forms and range sizes under recent and future climate across a 2000-fold range of spatial scales (0.008-16 km2). We produced unique current and future climate datasets by separately downscaling 4 km climate models to three finer resolutions based on 800, 270, and 90 m digital elevation models and deriving bioclimatic predictors from them. As climate-data resolution became coarser, SDMs predicted larger habitat area with diminishing spatial congruence between fine- and coarse-scale predictions. These trends were most pronounced at the coarsest resolutions and depended on climate scenario and species' range size. On average, SDMs projected onto 4 km climate data predicted 42% more stable habitat (the amount of spatial overlap between predicted current and future climatically suitable habitat) compared with 800 m data. We found only modest agreement between areas predicted to be stable by 90 m models generalized to 4 km grids compared with areas classified as stable based on 4 km models, suggesting that some climate refugia captured at finer scales may be missed using coarser scale data. These differences in projected locations of habitat change may have more serious implications than net habitat area when predictive maps form the basis of conservation decision making.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)473-483
Number of pages11
JournalGlobal Change Biology
Volume19
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2013

Fingerprint

climate
modeling
habitat
refugium
range size
Climate models
plant species
distribution
climate variation
Climate change
downscaling
floristics
Conservation
microhabitat
digital elevation model
Decision making
climate modeling
decision making
fold
climate change

Keywords

  • Biodiversity
  • California
  • Climate change
  • Downscaling
  • Habitat
  • Impacts
  • Spatial resolution
  • Terrain
  • Topography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology
  • Global and Planetary Change
  • Environmental Science(all)
  • Environmental Chemistry

Cite this

Franklin, J., Davis, F. W., Ikegami, M., Syphard, A. D., Flint, L. E., Flint, A. L., & Hannah, L. (2013). Modeling plant species distributions under future climates: How fine scale do climate projections need to be? Global Change Biology, 19(2), 473-483. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12051

Modeling plant species distributions under future climates : How fine scale do climate projections need to be? / Franklin, Janet; Davis, Frank W.; Ikegami, Makihiko; Syphard, Alexandra D.; Flint, Lorraine E.; Flint, Alan L.; Hannah, Lee.

In: Global Change Biology, Vol. 19, No. 2, 02.2013, p. 473-483.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Franklin, J, Davis, FW, Ikegami, M, Syphard, AD, Flint, LE, Flint, AL & Hannah, L 2013, 'Modeling plant species distributions under future climates: How fine scale do climate projections need to be?', Global Change Biology, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 473-483. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12051
Franklin, Janet ; Davis, Frank W. ; Ikegami, Makihiko ; Syphard, Alexandra D. ; Flint, Lorraine E. ; Flint, Alan L. ; Hannah, Lee. / Modeling plant species distributions under future climates : How fine scale do climate projections need to be?. In: Global Change Biology. 2013 ; Vol. 19, No. 2. pp. 473-483.
@article{9f7e33d322b5415d88b499992d487a38,
title = "Modeling plant species distributions under future climates: How fine scale do climate projections need to be?",
abstract = "Recent studies suggest that species distribution models (SDMs) based on fine-scale climate data may provide markedly different estimates of climate-change impacts than coarse-scale models. However, these studies disagree in their conclusions of how scale influences projected species distributions. In rugged terrain, coarse-scale climate grids may not capture topographically controlled climate variation at the scale that constitutes microhabitat or refugia for some species. Although finer scale data are therefore considered to better reflect climatic conditions experienced by species, there have been few formal analyses of how modeled distributions differ with scale. We modeled distributions for 52 plant species endemic to the California Floristic Province of different life forms and range sizes under recent and future climate across a 2000-fold range of spatial scales (0.008-16 km2). We produced unique current and future climate datasets by separately downscaling 4 km climate models to three finer resolutions based on 800, 270, and 90 m digital elevation models and deriving bioclimatic predictors from them. As climate-data resolution became coarser, SDMs predicted larger habitat area with diminishing spatial congruence between fine- and coarse-scale predictions. These trends were most pronounced at the coarsest resolutions and depended on climate scenario and species' range size. On average, SDMs projected onto 4 km climate data predicted 42{\%} more stable habitat (the amount of spatial overlap between predicted current and future climatically suitable habitat) compared with 800 m data. We found only modest agreement between areas predicted to be stable by 90 m models generalized to 4 km grids compared with areas classified as stable based on 4 km models, suggesting that some climate refugia captured at finer scales may be missed using coarser scale data. These differences in projected locations of habitat change may have more serious implications than net habitat area when predictive maps form the basis of conservation decision making.",
keywords = "Biodiversity, California, Climate change, Downscaling, Habitat, Impacts, Spatial resolution, Terrain, Topography",
author = "Janet Franklin and Davis, {Frank W.} and Makihiko Ikegami and Syphard, {Alexandra D.} and Flint, {Lorraine E.} and Flint, {Alan L.} and Lee Hannah",
year = "2013",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1111/gcb.12051",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "473--483",
journal = "Global Change Biology",
issn = "1354-1013",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Modeling plant species distributions under future climates

T2 - How fine scale do climate projections need to be?

AU - Franklin, Janet

AU - Davis, Frank W.

AU - Ikegami, Makihiko

AU - Syphard, Alexandra D.

AU - Flint, Lorraine E.

AU - Flint, Alan L.

AU - Hannah, Lee

PY - 2013/2

Y1 - 2013/2

N2 - Recent studies suggest that species distribution models (SDMs) based on fine-scale climate data may provide markedly different estimates of climate-change impacts than coarse-scale models. However, these studies disagree in their conclusions of how scale influences projected species distributions. In rugged terrain, coarse-scale climate grids may not capture topographically controlled climate variation at the scale that constitutes microhabitat or refugia for some species. Although finer scale data are therefore considered to better reflect climatic conditions experienced by species, there have been few formal analyses of how modeled distributions differ with scale. We modeled distributions for 52 plant species endemic to the California Floristic Province of different life forms and range sizes under recent and future climate across a 2000-fold range of spatial scales (0.008-16 km2). We produced unique current and future climate datasets by separately downscaling 4 km climate models to three finer resolutions based on 800, 270, and 90 m digital elevation models and deriving bioclimatic predictors from them. As climate-data resolution became coarser, SDMs predicted larger habitat area with diminishing spatial congruence between fine- and coarse-scale predictions. These trends were most pronounced at the coarsest resolutions and depended on climate scenario and species' range size. On average, SDMs projected onto 4 km climate data predicted 42% more stable habitat (the amount of spatial overlap between predicted current and future climatically suitable habitat) compared with 800 m data. We found only modest agreement between areas predicted to be stable by 90 m models generalized to 4 km grids compared with areas classified as stable based on 4 km models, suggesting that some climate refugia captured at finer scales may be missed using coarser scale data. These differences in projected locations of habitat change may have more serious implications than net habitat area when predictive maps form the basis of conservation decision making.

AB - Recent studies suggest that species distribution models (SDMs) based on fine-scale climate data may provide markedly different estimates of climate-change impacts than coarse-scale models. However, these studies disagree in their conclusions of how scale influences projected species distributions. In rugged terrain, coarse-scale climate grids may not capture topographically controlled climate variation at the scale that constitutes microhabitat or refugia for some species. Although finer scale data are therefore considered to better reflect climatic conditions experienced by species, there have been few formal analyses of how modeled distributions differ with scale. We modeled distributions for 52 plant species endemic to the California Floristic Province of different life forms and range sizes under recent and future climate across a 2000-fold range of spatial scales (0.008-16 km2). We produced unique current and future climate datasets by separately downscaling 4 km climate models to three finer resolutions based on 800, 270, and 90 m digital elevation models and deriving bioclimatic predictors from them. As climate-data resolution became coarser, SDMs predicted larger habitat area with diminishing spatial congruence between fine- and coarse-scale predictions. These trends were most pronounced at the coarsest resolutions and depended on climate scenario and species' range size. On average, SDMs projected onto 4 km climate data predicted 42% more stable habitat (the amount of spatial overlap between predicted current and future climatically suitable habitat) compared with 800 m data. We found only modest agreement between areas predicted to be stable by 90 m models generalized to 4 km grids compared with areas classified as stable based on 4 km models, suggesting that some climate refugia captured at finer scales may be missed using coarser scale data. These differences in projected locations of habitat change may have more serious implications than net habitat area when predictive maps form the basis of conservation decision making.

KW - Biodiversity

KW - California

KW - Climate change

KW - Downscaling

KW - Habitat

KW - Impacts

KW - Spatial resolution

KW - Terrain

KW - Topography

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84871936139&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84871936139&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/gcb.12051

DO - 10.1111/gcb.12051

M3 - Article

C2 - 23504785

AN - SCOPUS:84871936139

VL - 19

SP - 473

EP - 483

JO - Global Change Biology

JF - Global Change Biology

SN - 1354-1013

IS - 2

ER -