4.5 Article

Climate reconstruction analysis using coexistence likelihood estimation (CRACLE): A method for the estimation of climate using vegetation

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
卷 102, 期 8, 页码 1277-1289

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.1400500

关键词

climate change; climate niches; ecological filtering; GBIF; paleoclimate; plant community; species coexistence; vegetation; WorldClim

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PREMISE OF THE STUDY: Plant distributions have long been understood to be correlated with the environmental conditions to which species are adapted. Climate is one of the major components driving species distributions. Therefore, it is expected that the plants coexisting in a community are reflective of the local environment, particularly climate. METHODS: Presented here is a method for the estimation of climate from local plant species coexistence data. The method, Climate Reconstruction Analysis using Coexistence Likelihood Estimation (CRACLE), is a likelihood-based method that employs specimen collection data at a global scale for the inference of species climate tolerance. CRACLE calculates the maximum joint likelihood of coexistence given individual species climate tolerance characterization to estimate the expected climate. KEY RESULTS: Plant distribution data for more than 4000 species were used to show that this method accurately infers expected climate profiles for 165 sites with diverse climatic conditions. Estimates differ from the WorldClim global climate model by less than 1.5 degrees C on average for mean annual temperature and less than similar to 250 mm for mean annual precipitation. This is a significant improvement upon other plant-based climate-proxy methods. CONCLUSIONS: CRACLE validates long hypothesized interactions between climate and local associations of plant species. Furthermore, CRACLE successfully estimates climate that is consistent with the widely used WorldClim model and therefore may be applied to the quantitative estimation of paleoclimate in future studies.

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

4.5
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