Get access

Reducing uncertainty in projections of extinction risk from climate change

Authors

  • Miguel B. Araújo,

    Corresponding author
    1. Biodiversity Research Group, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3TB, UK,
    2. Biogeography and Conservation Laboratory, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, UK,
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Robert J. Whittaker,

    1. Biodiversity Research Group, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3TB, UK,
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Richard J. Ladle,

    1. Biodiversity Research Group, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3TB, UK,
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Markus Erhard

    1. Institute for Meteorology and Climate Research, Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Kreuzeckbahnstr, 19, 82467 Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany
    Search for more papers by this author

Correspondence: Miguel B. Araújo, Biodiversity Research Group, School of Geography and Environment, University of Oxford, Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3TB, UK. E-mail: maraujo@ouce.ox.ac.uk

ABSTRACT

Aim  Concern over the implications of climate change for biodiversity has led to the use of species–climate ‘envelope’ models to forecast risks of species extinctions under climate change scenarios. Recent studies have demonstrated significant variability in model projections and there remains a need to test the accuracy of models and to reduce uncertainties. Testing of models has been limited by a lack of data against which projections of future ranges can be tested. Here we provide a first test of the predictive accuracy of such models using observed species’ range shifts and climate change in two periods of the recent past.

Location  Britain.

Methods  Observed range shifts for 116 breeding bird species in Britain between 1967 and 1972 (t1) and 1987–91 (t2) are used. We project range shifts between t1 and t2 for each species based on observed climate using 16 alternative models (4 methods × 2 data parameterizations × 2 rules to transform probabilities of occurrence into presence and absence records).

Results  Modelling results were extremely variable, with projected range shifts varying both in magnitude and in direction from observed changes and from each other. However, using approaches that explore the central tendency (consensus) of model projections, we were able to improve agreement between projected and observed shifts significantly.

Conclusions  Our results provide the first empirical evidence of the value of species–climate ‘envelope’ models under climate change and demonstrate reduction in uncertainty and improvement in accuracy through selection of the most consensual projections.

Ancillary