IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v457y2021ics0304380021002453.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A less data demanding ecophysiological niche modeling approach for mammals with comparison to conventional correlative niche modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Tourinho, Luara
  • Sinervo, Barry
  • Caetano, Gabriel Henrique de Oliveira
  • Vale, Mariana M.

Abstract

Ecophysiological models are more data demanding and, consequently, less used than correlative ecological niche models to predict species’ distribution under climate change, especially for endotherms. Hybrid models that integrate both approaches are even less used, and several aspects about their predictions (e.g. accuracy, geographic extent and uncertainty) have been poorly explored. We developed a hybrid model for mammals using hours of activity and hours of heat stress as mechanistic variables, fitted using macroclimatic data and applied to conventional correlative modeling. We then compared the outputs from conventional correlative models with our hybrid model for 58 tropical mammals in term of accuracy, uncertainty, and predicted geographic distribution under climate change. We expected that hybrid models to have higher accuracy than correlative ones, with difference in predicted geographic distribution extent. We found no substantial differences between correlative and hybrid predictions for accuracy, uncertainty, and extent. Although the area predicted as suitable did not differ in extent, they differ in location, with lower congruence between models for future prediction. This result challenged the widespread assumption that hybrid models are more accurate. The ecophysiological model approach proposed here ease ecophysiological data requirements. We propose, therefore, choosing model approach based on study's objective, rather than on data requirements or the assumption that hybrid models have better predictions. The main advantage of the hybrid model is in providing a more complete view of the species response, as proximal (causal) and distal (environment) aspects are combined.

Suggested Citation

  • Tourinho, Luara & Sinervo, Barry & Caetano, Gabriel Henrique de Oliveira & Vale, Mariana M., 2021. "A less data demanding ecophysiological niche modeling approach for mammals with comparison to conventional correlative niche modeling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 457(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:457:y:2021:i:c:s0304380021002453
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109687
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380021002453
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109687?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michela Pacifici & Wendy B. Foden & Piero Visconti & James E. M. Watson & Stuart H.M. Butchart & Kit M. Kovacs & Brett R. Scheffers & David G. Hole & Tara G. Martin & H. Resit Akçakaya & Richard T. Co, 2015. "Assessing species vulnerability to climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(3), pages 215-224, March.
    2. Jeffrey E. Lane & Loeske E. B. Kruuk & Anne Charmantier & Jan O. Murie & F. Stephen Dobson, 2012. "Delayed phenology and reduced fitness associated with climate change in a wild hibernator," Nature, Nature, vol. 489(7417), pages 554-557, September.
    3. Barve, Narayani & Barve, Vijay & Jiménez-Valverde, Alberto & Lira-Noriega, Andrés & Maher, Sean P. & Peterson, A. Townsend & Soberón, Jorge & Villalobos, Fabricio, 2011. "The crucial role of the accessible area in ecological niche modeling and species distribution modeling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(11), pages 1810-1819.
    4. Zhu, Gengping & Fan, Jingyu & Peterson, A. Townsend, 2021. "Cautions in weighting individual ecological niche models in ensemble forecasting," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 448(C).
    5. Huang, Minyi & Kong, Xiaoquan & Varela, Sara & Duan, Renyan, 2016. "The Niche Limitation Method (NicheLim), a new algorithm for generating virtual species to study biogeography," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 197-202.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Loeske E B Kruuk, 2017. "A new explanation for unexpected evolution in body size," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-6, February.
    2. Wolke Tobón-Niedfeldt & Alicia Mastretta-Yanes & Tania Urquiza-Haas & Bárbara Goettsch & Angela P. Cuervo-Robayo & Esmeralda Urquiza-Haas & M. Andrea Orjuela-R & Francisca Acevedo Gasman & Oswaldo Oli, 2022. "Incorporating evolutionary and threat processes into crop wild relatives conservation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Andrew John & Avril Horne & Rory Nathan & Michael Stewardson & J. Angus Webb & Jun Wang & N. LeRoy Poff, 2021. "Climate change and freshwater ecology: Hydrological and ecological methods of comparable complexity are needed to predict risk," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(2), March.
    4. Andrew J Allyn & Michael A Alexander & Bradley S Franklin & Felix Massiot-Granier & Andrew J Pershing & James D Scott & Katherine E Mills, 2020. "Comparing and synthesizing quantitative distribution models and qualitative vulnerability assessments to project marine species distributions under climate change," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-28, April.
    5. Disha Sachan & Pankaj Kumar & Md. Saquib Saharwardi, 2022. "Contemporary climate change velocity for near-surface temperatures over India," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Ochoa-Ochoa, Leticia M. & Flores-Villela, Oscar A. & Bezaury-Creel, Juan E., 2016. "Using one vs. many, sensitivity and uncertainty analyses of species distribution models with focus on conservation area networks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 372-382.
    7. Carlos Yañez-Arenas & A. Townsend Peterson & Karla Rodríguez-Medina & Narayani Barve, 2016. "Mapping current and future potential snakebite risk in the new world," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 697-711, February.
    8. Diederik Strubbe & Laura Jiménez & A. Márcia Barbosa & Amy J. S. Davis & Luc Lens & Carsten Rahbek, 2023. "Mechanistic models project bird invasions with accuracy," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.
    9. Jiménez, Laura & Soberón, Jorge & Christen, J. Andrés & Soto, Desireé, 2019. "On the problem of modeling a fundamental niche from occurrence data," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 397(C), pages 74-83.
    10. Herkt, K. Matthias B. & Barnikel, Günter & Skidmore, Andrew K. & Fahr, Jakob, 2016. "A high-resolution model of bat diversity and endemism for continental Africa," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 9-28.
    11. Lucie Kuczynski & Mathieu Chevalier & Pascal Laffaille & Marion Legrand & Gaël Grenouillet, 2017. "Indirect effect of temperature on fish population abundances through phenological changes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-13, April.
    12. Carlos Yañez-Arenas & A Townsend Peterson & Pierre Mokondoko & Octavio Rojas-Soto & Enrique Martínez-Meyer, 2014. "The Use of Ecological Niche Modeling to Infer Potential Risk Areas of Snakebite in the Mexican State of Veracruz," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    13. Marianna V. P. Simões & Hanieh Saeedi & Marlon E. Cobos & Angelika Brandt, 2021. "Environmental matching reveals non-uniform range-shift patterns in benthic marine Crustacea," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-20, October.
    14. Arpit Deomurari & Ajay Sharma & Dipankar Ghose & Randeep Singh, 2023. "Potential Range Map Dataset of Indian Birds," Data, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-11, September.
    15. Cesar A Marchioro, 2016. "Global Potential Distribution of Bactrocera carambolae and the Risks for Fruit Production in Brazil," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-16, November.
    16. Ram C Poudel & Michael Möller & Lian-Ming Gao & Antje Ahrends & Sushim R Baral & Jie Liu & Philip Thomas & De-Zhu Li, 2012. "Using Morphological, Molecular and Climatic Data to Delimitate Yews along the Hindu Kush-Himalaya and Adjacent Regions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(10), pages 1-15, October.
    17. Jesús Aguirre-Gutiérrez & Luísa G Carvalheiro & Chiara Polce & E Emiel van Loon & Niels Raes & Menno Reemer & Jacobus C Biesmeijer, 2013. "Fit-for-Purpose: Species Distribution Model Performance Depends on Evaluation Criteria – Dutch Hoverflies as a Case Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-11, May.
    18. Rotllan-Puig, Xavier & Traveset, Anna, 2021. "Determining the minimal background area for species distribution models: MinBAR package," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 439(C).
    19. Watling, James I. & Brandt, Laura A. & Bucklin, David N. & Fujisaki, Ikuko & Mazzotti, Frank J. & Romañach, Stephanie S. & Speroterra, Carolina, 2015. "Performance metrics and variance partitioning reveal sources of uncertainty in species distribution models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 309, pages 48-59.
    20. Jarnevich, Catherine S. & Talbert, Marian & Morisette, Jeffery & Aldridge, Cameron & Brown, Cynthia S. & Kumar, Sunil & Manier, Daniel & Talbert, Colin & Holcombe, Tracy, 2017. "Minimizing effects of methodological decisions on interpretation and prediction in species distribution studies: An example with background selection," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 363(C), pages 48-56.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:457:y:2021:i:c:s0304380021002453. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.