Does scale matter? A systematic review of incorporating biological realism when predicting changes in species distributions

There is ample evidence that biotic factors, such as biotic interactions and dispersal capacity, can affect species distributions and influence species' responses to climate change. However, little is known about how these factors affect predictions from species distribution models (SDMs) with...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2018-04, Vol.13 (4), p.e0194650
Hauptverfasser: Record, Sydne, Strecker, Angela, Tuanmu, Mao-Ning, Beaudrot, Lydia, Zarnetske, Phoebe, Belmaker, Jonathan, Gerstner, Beth
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 4
container_start_page e0194650
container_title PloS one
container_volume 13
creator Record, Sydne
Strecker, Angela
Tuanmu, Mao-Ning
Beaudrot, Lydia
Zarnetske, Phoebe
Belmaker, Jonathan
Gerstner, Beth
description There is ample evidence that biotic factors, such as biotic interactions and dispersal capacity, can affect species distributions and influence species' responses to climate change. However, little is known about how these factors affect predictions from species distribution models (SDMs) with respect to spatial grain and extent of the models. Understanding how spatial scale influences the effects of biological processes in SDMs is important because SDMs are one of the primary tools used by conservation biologists to assess biodiversity impacts of climate change. We systematically reviewed SDM studies published from 2003-2015 using ISI Web of Science searches to: (1) determine the current state and key knowledge gaps of SDMs that incorporate biotic interactions and dispersal; and (2) understand how choice of spatial scale may alter the influence of biological processes on SDM predictions. We used linear mixed effects models to examine how predictions from SDMs changed in response to the effects of spatial scale, dispersal, and biotic interactions. There were important biases in studies including an emphasis on terrestrial ecosystems in northern latitudes and little representation of aquatic ecosystems. Our results suggest that neither spatial extent nor grain influence projected climate-induced changes in species ranges when SDMs include dispersal or biotic interactions. We identified several knowledge gaps and suggest that SDM studies forecasting the effects of climate change should: 1) address broader ranges of taxa and locations; and 1) report the grain size, extent, and results with and without biological complexity. The spatial scale of analysis in SDMs did not affect estimates of projected range shifts with dispersal and biotic interactions. However, the lack of reporting on results with and without biological complexity precluded many studies from our analysis.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0194650
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2024796413</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A534577810</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_7ea568ae103d4e56b0c7da8ab8975a38</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A534577810</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-dc304c4ab58b0563eea793c81e67b5efc6877520be9fd140574cfc017e34d9323</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkl2L1DAYhYso7jr6D0QLguDFjGnz1d4ow_o1sLDg121I07edDG3STdJdF_-82ZnuMgUF6UWSt885LScnSZ5naJVhnr3d2dEZ2a0Ga2CFspIwih4kp1mJ8yXLEX54tD9Jnni_Q4jigrHHyUleMpqXmJ0mvz9Y8KlXsoO0lyGAe5-uU3_jA8SjVqmDKw3XqW1SbZR1g3VxbNq00razrY7CiMhO-z693oJJBwe1VntEbaVpo7s2qR9A6bittQ9OV2PQ1vinyaNGdh6eTesi-fHp4_ezL8vzi8-bs_X5UrEyD8taYUQUkRUtKkQZBpC8xKrIgPGKQqNYwTnNUQVlU2cEUU5Uo1DGAZM6JoAXycuD79BZL6bcvMhRTnjJSIYjsTkQtZU7MTjdS3cjrNRiP7CuFdLFNDoQHCRlhYQM4ZoAZRVSvJaFrIqSU4mL6PVu-tpY9VArMMHJbmY6f2P0VrT2StCiLHi0XSSvJgNnL0fw4R-_PFFtvDqhTWOjmeq1V2JNMaGcF3uv1V-o-NTQaxWb0-g4nwnezASRCfArtHL0Xmy-ff1_9uLnnH19xG5jY8LW2-5QhDlIDqBy1nsHzX1yGRK3xb9LQ9wWX0zFj7IXx6nfi-6ajv8AbNUAdQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2024796413</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does scale matter? A systematic review of incorporating biological realism when predicting changes in species distributions</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Record, Sydne ; Strecker, Angela ; Tuanmu, Mao-Ning ; Beaudrot, Lydia ; Zarnetske, Phoebe ; Belmaker, Jonathan ; Gerstner, Beth</creator><contributor>Bosso, Luciano</contributor><creatorcontrib>Record, Sydne ; Strecker, Angela ; Tuanmu, Mao-Ning ; Beaudrot, Lydia ; Zarnetske, Phoebe ; Belmaker, Jonathan ; Gerstner, Beth ; Bosso, Luciano</creatorcontrib><description>There is ample evidence that biotic factors, such as biotic interactions and dispersal capacity, can affect species distributions and influence species' responses to climate change. However, little is known about how these factors affect predictions from species distribution models (SDMs) with respect to spatial grain and extent of the models. Understanding how spatial scale influences the effects of biological processes in SDMs is important because SDMs are one of the primary tools used by conservation biologists to assess biodiversity impacts of climate change. We systematically reviewed SDM studies published from 2003-2015 using ISI Web of Science searches to: (1) determine the current state and key knowledge gaps of SDMs that incorporate biotic interactions and dispersal; and (2) understand how choice of spatial scale may alter the influence of biological processes on SDM predictions. We used linear mixed effects models to examine how predictions from SDMs changed in response to the effects of spatial scale, dispersal, and biotic interactions. There were important biases in studies including an emphasis on terrestrial ecosystems in northern latitudes and little representation of aquatic ecosystems. Our results suggest that neither spatial extent nor grain influence projected climate-induced changes in species ranges when SDMs include dispersal or biotic interactions. We identified several knowledge gaps and suggest that SDM studies forecasting the effects of climate change should: 1) address broader ranges of taxa and locations; and 1) report the grain size, extent, and results with and without biological complexity. The spatial scale of analysis in SDMs did not affect estimates of projected range shifts with dispersal and biotic interactions. However, the lack of reporting on results with and without biological complexity precluded many studies from our analysis.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194650</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29652936</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Animals ; Aquatic ecosystems ; Biodiversity ; Biological activity ; Biological effects ; Biological research ; Biologists ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Biotic factors ; Climate Change ; Climate change influences ; Climate effects ; Climatic change influences ; Complexity ; Conservation ; Conservation biology ; Dispersal ; Dispersion ; Earth Sciences ; Ecology ; Ecology and Environmental Sciences ; Ecosystem ; Ecosystems ; Environmental aspects ; Environmental assessment ; Environmental changes ; Environmental conditions ; Environmental impact ; Environmental policy ; Evolutionary biology ; Grain size ; Influence ; Models, Theoretical ; People and Places ; Predictions ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Spatial analysis ; Spatial distribution ; Species ; Systematic review ; Terrestrial ecosystems ; Terrestrial environments ; Wildlife conservation</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2018-04, Vol.13 (4), p.e0194650</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2018 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2018 Record et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2018 Record et al 2018 Record et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-dc304c4ab58b0563eea793c81e67b5efc6877520be9fd140574cfc017e34d9323</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-dc304c4ab58b0563eea793c81e67b5efc6877520be9fd140574cfc017e34d9323</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7293-2155</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5898710/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5898710/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,2928,23866,27866,27924,27925,53791,53793,79600,79601</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29652936$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Bosso, Luciano</contributor><creatorcontrib>Record, Sydne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strecker, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tuanmu, Mao-Ning</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beaudrot, Lydia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zarnetske, Phoebe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Belmaker, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gerstner, Beth</creatorcontrib><title>Does scale matter? A systematic review of incorporating biological realism when predicting changes in species distributions</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>There is ample evidence that biotic factors, such as biotic interactions and dispersal capacity, can affect species distributions and influence species' responses to climate change. However, little is known about how these factors affect predictions from species distribution models (SDMs) with respect to spatial grain and extent of the models. Understanding how spatial scale influences the effects of biological processes in SDMs is important because SDMs are one of the primary tools used by conservation biologists to assess biodiversity impacts of climate change. We systematically reviewed SDM studies published from 2003-2015 using ISI Web of Science searches to: (1) determine the current state and key knowledge gaps of SDMs that incorporate biotic interactions and dispersal; and (2) understand how choice of spatial scale may alter the influence of biological processes on SDM predictions. We used linear mixed effects models to examine how predictions from SDMs changed in response to the effects of spatial scale, dispersal, and biotic interactions. There were important biases in studies including an emphasis on terrestrial ecosystems in northern latitudes and little representation of aquatic ecosystems. Our results suggest that neither spatial extent nor grain influence projected climate-induced changes in species ranges when SDMs include dispersal or biotic interactions. We identified several knowledge gaps and suggest that SDM studies forecasting the effects of climate change should: 1) address broader ranges of taxa and locations; and 1) report the grain size, extent, and results with and without biological complexity. The spatial scale of analysis in SDMs did not affect estimates of projected range shifts with dispersal and biotic interactions. However, the lack of reporting on results with and without biological complexity precluded many studies from our analysis.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Aquatic ecosystems</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biological activity</subject><subject>Biological effects</subject><subject>Biological research</subject><subject>Biologists</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biotic factors</subject><subject>Climate Change</subject><subject>Climate change influences</subject><subject>Climate effects</subject><subject>Climatic change influences</subject><subject>Complexity</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Conservation biology</subject><subject>Dispersal</subject><subject>Dispersion</subject><subject>Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Ecology and Environmental Sciences</subject><subject>Ecosystem</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental aspects</subject><subject>Environmental assessment</subject><subject>Environmental changes</subject><subject>Environmental conditions</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Environmental policy</subject><subject>Evolutionary biology</subject><subject>Grain size</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Models, Theoretical</subject><subject>People and Places</subject><subject>Predictions</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Spatial analysis</subject><subject>Spatial distribution</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Terrestrial ecosystems</subject><subject>Terrestrial environments</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkl2L1DAYhYso7jr6D0QLguDFjGnz1d4ow_o1sLDg121I07edDG3STdJdF_-82ZnuMgUF6UWSt885LScnSZ5naJVhnr3d2dEZ2a0Ga2CFspIwih4kp1mJ8yXLEX54tD9Jnni_Q4jigrHHyUleMpqXmJ0mvz9Y8KlXsoO0lyGAe5-uU3_jA8SjVqmDKw3XqW1SbZR1g3VxbNq00razrY7CiMhO-z693oJJBwe1VntEbaVpo7s2qR9A6bittQ9OV2PQ1vinyaNGdh6eTesi-fHp4_ezL8vzi8-bs_X5UrEyD8taYUQUkRUtKkQZBpC8xKrIgPGKQqNYwTnNUQVlU2cEUU5Uo1DGAZM6JoAXycuD79BZL6bcvMhRTnjJSIYjsTkQtZU7MTjdS3cjrNRiP7CuFdLFNDoQHCRlhYQM4ZoAZRVSvJaFrIqSU4mL6PVu-tpY9VArMMHJbmY6f2P0VrT2StCiLHi0XSSvJgNnL0fw4R-_PFFtvDqhTWOjmeq1V2JNMaGcF3uv1V-o-NTQaxWb0-g4nwnezASRCfArtHL0Xmy-ff1_9uLnnH19xG5jY8LW2-5QhDlIDqBy1nsHzX1yGRK3xb9LQ9wWX0zFj7IXx6nfi-6ajv8AbNUAdQ</recordid><startdate>20180413</startdate><enddate>20180413</enddate><creator>Record, Sydne</creator><creator>Strecker, Angela</creator><creator>Tuanmu, Mao-Ning</creator><creator>Beaudrot, Lydia</creator><creator>Zarnetske, Phoebe</creator><creator>Belmaker, Jonathan</creator><creator>Gerstner, Beth</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7293-2155</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180413</creationdate><title>Does scale matter? A systematic review of incorporating biological realism when predicting changes in species distributions</title><author>Record, Sydne ; Strecker, Angela ; Tuanmu, Mao-Ning ; Beaudrot, Lydia ; Zarnetske, Phoebe ; Belmaker, Jonathan ; Gerstner, Beth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-dc304c4ab58b0563eea793c81e67b5efc6877520be9fd140574cfc017e34d9323</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Aquatic ecosystems</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biological activity</topic><topic>Biological effects</topic><topic>Biological research</topic><topic>Biologists</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biotic factors</topic><topic>Climate Change</topic><topic>Climate change influences</topic><topic>Climate effects</topic><topic>Climatic change influences</topic><topic>Complexity</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Conservation biology</topic><topic>Dispersal</topic><topic>Dispersion</topic><topic>Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Ecology and Environmental Sciences</topic><topic>Ecosystem</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental aspects</topic><topic>Environmental assessment</topic><topic>Environmental changes</topic><topic>Environmental conditions</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Environmental policy</topic><topic>Evolutionary biology</topic><topic>Grain size</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Models, Theoretical</topic><topic>People and Places</topic><topic>Predictions</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Spatial analysis</topic><topic>Spatial distribution</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Terrestrial ecosystems</topic><topic>Terrestrial environments</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Record, Sydne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strecker, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tuanmu, Mao-Ning</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beaudrot, Lydia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zarnetske, Phoebe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Belmaker, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gerstner, Beth</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Record, Sydne</au><au>Strecker, Angela</au><au>Tuanmu, Mao-Ning</au><au>Beaudrot, Lydia</au><au>Zarnetske, Phoebe</au><au>Belmaker, Jonathan</au><au>Gerstner, Beth</au><au>Bosso, Luciano</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Does scale matter? A systematic review of incorporating biological realism when predicting changes in species distributions</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2018-04-13</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>e0194650</spage><pages>e0194650-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>There is ample evidence that biotic factors, such as biotic interactions and dispersal capacity, can affect species distributions and influence species' responses to climate change. However, little is known about how these factors affect predictions from species distribution models (SDMs) with respect to spatial grain and extent of the models. Understanding how spatial scale influences the effects of biological processes in SDMs is important because SDMs are one of the primary tools used by conservation biologists to assess biodiversity impacts of climate change. We systematically reviewed SDM studies published from 2003-2015 using ISI Web of Science searches to: (1) determine the current state and key knowledge gaps of SDMs that incorporate biotic interactions and dispersal; and (2) understand how choice of spatial scale may alter the influence of biological processes on SDM predictions. We used linear mixed effects models to examine how predictions from SDMs changed in response to the effects of spatial scale, dispersal, and biotic interactions. There were important biases in studies including an emphasis on terrestrial ecosystems in northern latitudes and little representation of aquatic ecosystems. Our results suggest that neither spatial extent nor grain influence projected climate-induced changes in species ranges when SDMs include dispersal or biotic interactions. We identified several knowledge gaps and suggest that SDM studies forecasting the effects of climate change should: 1) address broader ranges of taxa and locations; and 1) report the grain size, extent, and results with and without biological complexity. The spatial scale of analysis in SDMs did not affect estimates of projected range shifts with dispersal and biotic interactions. However, the lack of reporting on results with and without biological complexity precluded many studies from our analysis.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>29652936</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0194650</doi><tpages>e0194650</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7293-2155</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2018-04, Vol.13 (4), p.e0194650
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_2024796413
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; PAIS Index; Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Animals
Aquatic ecosystems
Biodiversity
Biological activity
Biological effects
Biological research
Biologists
Biology and Life Sciences
Biotic factors
Climate Change
Climate change influences
Climate effects
Climatic change influences
Complexity
Conservation
Conservation biology
Dispersal
Dispersion
Earth Sciences
Ecology
Ecology and Environmental Sciences
Ecosystem
Ecosystems
Environmental aspects
Environmental assessment
Environmental changes
Environmental conditions
Environmental impact
Environmental policy
Evolutionary biology
Grain size
Influence
Models, Theoretical
People and Places
Predictions
Research and Analysis Methods
Spatial analysis
Spatial distribution
Species
Systematic review
Terrestrial ecosystems
Terrestrial environments
Wildlife conservation
title Does scale matter? A systematic review of incorporating biological realism when predicting changes in species distributions
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T23%3A11%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20scale%20matter?%20A%20systematic%20review%20of%20incorporating%20biological%20realism%20when%20predicting%20changes%20in%20species%20distributions&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Record,%20Sydne&rft.date=2018-04-13&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=e0194650&rft.pages=e0194650-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0194650&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA534577810%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2024796413&rft_id=info:pmid/29652936&rft_galeid=A534577810&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_7ea568ae103d4e56b0c7da8ab8975a38&rfr_iscdi=true