Universitätspublikationen
Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- climate change (2) (remove)
Institute
- Geowissenschaften (2) (remove)
Aim: Predicting future changes in species richness in response to climate change is one of the key challenges in biogeography and conservation ecology. Stacked species distribution models (S‐SDMs) are a commonly used tool to predict current and future species richness. Macroecological models (MEMs), regression models with species richness as response variable, are a less computationally intensive alternative to S‐SDMs. Here, we aim to compare the results of two model types (S‐SDMS and MEMs), for the first time for more than 14,000 species across multiple taxa globally, and to trace the uncertainty in future predictions back to the input data and modelling approach used.
Location: Global land, excluding Antarctica.
Taxon: Amphibians, birds and mammals.
Methods: We fitted S‐SDMs and MEMs using a consistent set of bioclimatic variables and model algorithms and conducted species richness predictions under current and future conditions. For the latter, we used four general circulation models (GCMs) under two representative concentration pathways (RCP2.6 and RCP6.0). Predicted species richness was compared between S‐SDMs and MEMs and for current conditions also to extent‐of‐occurrence (EOO) species richness patterns. For future predictions, we quantified the variance in predicted species richness patterns explained by the choice of model type, model algorithm and GCM using hierarchical cluster analysis and variance partitioning.
Results: Under current conditions, species richness predictions from MEMs and S‐SDMs were strongly correlated with EOO‐based species richness. However, both model types over‐predicted areas with low and under‐predicted areas with high species richness. Outputs from MEMs and S‐SDMs were also highly correlated among each other under current and future conditions. The variance between future predictions was mostly explained by model type.
Main conclusions: Both model types were able to reproduce EOO‐based patterns in global terrestrial vertebrate richness, but produce less collinear predictions of future species richness. Model type by far contributes to most of the variation in the different future species richness predictions, indicating that the two model types should not be used interchangeably. Nevertheless, both model types have their justification, as MEMs can also include species with a restricted range, whereas S‐SDMs are useful for looking at potential species‐specific responses.
Wetlands such as bogs, swamps, or freshwater marshes are hotspots of biodiversity. For 5.1 million km2 of inland wetlands, the dynamics of area and water storage, which strongly impact biodiversity and ecosystem services, were simulated using the global hydrological model WaterGAP. For the first time, the impacts of both human water use and man‐made reservoirs (WUR) and future climate change (CC) on wetlands around the globe were quantified. WUR impacts are concentrated in arid/semiarid regions, where WUR decreased mean wetland water storage by more than 5% on 8.2% of the mean wetland area during 1986–2005 (Am), with highest decreases in groundwater depletion area. Using output of three climate models, CC impacts on wetlands were quantified, distinguishing unavoidable impacts [i.e., at 2 °C global warming (GW)] from avoidable impacts (difference between 3 °C and 2 °C impacts). Even unavoidable CC impacts are projected to be much larger than WUR impacts, also in arid/semiarid regions. On most wetland area with reliable estimates, avoidable CC impacts are more than twice as large as unavoidable impacts. In case of 2 °C GW, half of Am is estimated to be unaffected by mean storage changes of more than 5%, but only one third in case of 3 °C GW. Temporal variability of water storage will increase for most wetlands. Wetlands in dry regions will be affected the most, particularly by water storage decreases in the dry season. Different from wealthier countries, low‐income countries will dominantly suffer from a decrease in wetland water storage due to CC.