4.8 Article

Microclimatic challenges in global change biology

期刊

GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY
卷 19, 期 10, 页码 2932-2939

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12257

关键词

body size; climate change; downscaling; fractals; grid size; maxent; refugia; spatial resolution; species distribution models; temperature

资金

  1. NSF [IOS-0844916]
  2. ANR Blanc MicroCliMite [ANR-2010 BLAN-1706-02]
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences
  4. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems [0844916] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite decades of work on climate change biology, the scientific community remains uncertain about where and when most species distributions will respond to altered climates. A major barrier is the spatial mismatch between the size of organisms and the scale at which climate data are collected and modeled. Using a meta-analysis of published literature, we show that grid lengths in species distribution models are, on average, ca. 10000-fold larger than the animals they study, and ca. 1000-fold larger than the plants they study. And the gap is even worse than these ratios indicate, as most work has focused on organisms that are significantly biased toward large size. This mismatch is problematic because organisms do not experience climate on coarse scales. Rather, they live in microclimates, which can be highly heterogeneous and strongly divergent from surrounding macroclimates. Bridging the spatial gap should be a high priority for research and will require gathering climate data at finer scales, developing better methods for downscaling environmental data to microclimates, and improving our statistical understanding of variation at finer scales. Interdisciplinary collaborations (including ecologists, engineers, climatologists, meteorologists, statisticians, and geographers) will be key to bridging the gap, and ultimately to providing scientifically grounded data and recommendations to conservation biologists and policy makers.

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

4.8
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