4.8 Article

Rapid upslope shifts in New Guinean birds illustrate strong distributional responses of tropical montane species to global warming

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1318190111

Keywords

climate change; tropical biodiversity; tropical mountains

Funding

  1. Athena Fund of the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology
  2. Explorer's Club
  3. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship [2011083591]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Temperate-zone species have responded to warming temperatures by shifting their distributions poleward and upslope. Thermal tolerance data suggests that tropical species may respond to warming temperatures even more strongly than temperate-zone species, but this prediction has yet to be tested. We addressed this data gap by conducting resurveys to measure distributional responses to temperature increases in the elevational limits of the avifaunas of two geographically and faunally independent New Guinean mountains, Mt. Karimui and Karkar Island, 47 and 44 y after they were originally surveyed. Although species richness is roughly five times greater on mainland Mt. Karimui than oceanic Karkar Island, distributional shifts at both sites were similar: upslope shifts averaged 113 m (Mt. Karimui) and 152 m (Karkar Island) for upper limits and 95 m (Mt. Karimui) and 123 m (Karkar Island) for lower limits. We incorporated these results into a metaanalysis to compare distributional responses of tropical species with those of temperate-zone species, finding that average upslope shifts in tropical montane species match local temperature increases significantly more closely than in temperate-zone montane species. That tropical species appear to be strong responders has global conservation implications and provides empirical support to hitherto untested models that predict widespread extinctions in upper-elevation tropical endemics with small ranges.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available