4.0 Article

Environmental predictors for the distribution of the Caspian green lizard, Lacerta strigata Eichwald, 1831, along elevational gradients of the Elburz Mountains in northern Iran

期刊

TURKISH JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY
卷 43, 期 1, 页码 106-113

出版社

Tubitak Scientific & Technological Research Council Turkey
DOI: 10.3906/zoo-1808-15

关键词

Lacerta strigata; habitat; normalized difference vegetation index; distribution modeling; conservation

类别

资金

  1. Iran National Science Foundation [PHD95100438]
  2. Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology (MSRT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Within its range, the Caspian green lizard, Lacerta strigata, occurs in the Elburz Mountains (northern Iran) at elevations from below sea level to approximately 2700 m a.s.l. To determine the environmental factors affecting the distribution of this lizard, we used an ensemble approach to model the distribution of the Caspian green lizard (Lacerta strigata) in Iran using four algorithms (generalized boosted model, maximum entropy, generalized linear model, random forest). Results revealed that low-elevation habitats between the Elburz Mountains and the Caspian Sea are the most suitable habitats for the species. The normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), annual precipitation (both with positive relationships), and altitude (with a negative relationship) were the most important environmental variables influencing the distribution of the species. NDVI was likely the most important variable because it is an indicator of plant productivity, which presumably influences the availability of food resources such as insects. We also tested the validity of an old distribution record for the species near Shiraz in southwestern Iran. The results show that southwestern Iran is not ecologically suitable for the species. As our results highlighted that the NDVI strongly affects distribution of the species, we suggest protection of vegetation cover in the habitat of the species for conservation of Lacerta strigata.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据