Biotic and abiotic variables show little redundancy in explaining tree species distributions
E. S. Meier (eliane.meier@wsl.ch), F. Kienast, P. B. Pearman and N. E. Zimmermann, Land Use Dynamics, Swiss Federal Research Inst. WSL, Zurcherstrasse 111, CH‐8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland. – J.‐C. Svenning, Ecoinformatics and Biodiversity Group, Dept of Biological Sciences, Aarhus Univ., Ny Munkegade 114, DK‐8000 Aarhus C., Denmark. – W. Thuiller, Laboratoire d'Ecologie Alpine, CNRS UMR 5553, Univ., Joseph Fourier, BP 53, FR‐38041 Grenoble Cedex 9, France. – M. B. Araújo, Depto de Biodiversidad y Biologia Evolutiva, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, CSIC, /José Gutiérrez Abascal, 2, ES‐28006 Madrid, Spain, and ‘Rui Nabeiro’ Biodiversity Chair, CIBIO, Univ. de Évora, Largo dos Colegiais, PT‐7000 Évora, Portugal. – A. Guisan, Dept of Ecology and Evolution, Inst. of Geology and Paleontology, Univ. of Lausanne, Biophore Building, CH‐1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Get access to the full version of this article.View access options below.
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials.
If you have previously obtained access with your personal account, Please log in.
If you previously purchased this article, Log in to Readcube.
You previously purchased this article on READCUBE_PURCHASE_DATE. Click on an option below to access.
Logged in as READCUBE_USER. Log out of ReadCube.
Abstract
Abiotic factors such as climate and soil determine the species fundamental niche, which is further constrained by biotic interactions such as interspecific competition. To parameterize this realized niche, species distribution models (SDMs) most often relate species occurrence data to abiotic variables, but few SDM studies include biotic predictors to help explain species distributions. Therefore, most predictions of species distributions under future climates assume implicitly that biotic interactions remain constant or exert only minor influence on large‐scale spatial distributions, which is also largely expected for species with high competitive ability. We examined the extent to which variance explained by SDMs can be attributed to abiotic or biotic predictors and how this depends on species traits. We fit generalized linear models for 11 common tree species in Switzerland using three different sets of predictor variables: biotic, abiotic, and the combination of both sets. We used variance partitioning to estimate the proportion of the variance explained by biotic and abiotic predictors, jointly and independently. Inclusion of biotic predictors improved the SDMs substantially. The joint contribution of biotic and abiotic predictors to explained deviance was relatively small (~9%) compared to the contribution of each predictor set individually (~20% each), indicating that the additional information on the realized niche brought by adding other species as predictors was largely independent of the abiotic (topo‐climatic) predictors. The influence of biotic predictors was relatively high for species preferably growing under low disturbance and low abiotic stress, species with long seed dispersal distances, species with high shade tolerance as juveniles and adults, and species that occur frequently and are dominant across the landscape. The influence of biotic variables on SDM performance indicates that community composition and other local biotic factors or abiotic processes not included in the abiotic predictors strongly influence prediction of species distributions. Improved prediction of species' potential distributions in future climates and communities may assist strategies for sustainable forest management.
Citing Literature
Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 112
- Jürgen Zell, Brigitte Rohner, Esther Thürig and Golo Stadelmann, Modeling ingrowth for empirical forest prediction systems, Forest Ecology and Management, 10.1016/j.foreco.2018.11.052, 433, (771-779), (2019).
- D P Silva, A C Dias, L S Lecci and J Simião-Ferreira, Potential Effects of Future Climate Changes on Brazilian Cool-Adapted Stoneflies (Insecta: Plecoptera), Neotropical Entomology, 10.1007/s13744-018-0621-8, 48, 1, (57-70), (2018).
- Jennifer Morales‐Barbero and Julia Vega‐Álvarez, Input matters matter: Bioclimatic consistency to map more reliable species distribution models, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 10, 2, (212-224), (2018).
- David P. Wilkinson, Nick Golding, Gurutzeta Guillera‐Arroita, Reid Tingley and Michael A. McCarthy, A comparison of joint species distribution models for presence–absence data, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 10, 2, (198-211), (2018).
- Christian Rellstab, Benjamin Dauphin, Stefan Zoller, Sabine Brodbeck and Felix Gugerli, Using transcriptome sequencing and pooled exome capture to study local adaptation in the giga‐genome of Pinus cembra, Molecular Ecology Resources, 19, 2, (536-551), (2019).
- Morgan Jade Raath, Peter Christiaan Roux, Ruan Veldtman and Michelle Greve, Incorporating biotic interactions in the distribution models of African wild silk moths (Gonometa species, Lasiocampidae) using different representations of modelled host tree distributions, Austral Ecology, 43, 3, (316-327), (2017).
- Karl H. Mellert, Jonathan Lenoir, Susanne Winter, Christian Kölling, Andraž Čarni, Isabel Dorado-Liñán, Jean-Claude Gégout, Axel Göttlein, Daniel Hornstein, Matthias Jantsch, Nina Juvan, Eckart Kolb, Eduardo López-Senespleda, Annette Menzel, Dejan Stojanović, Steffen Täger, Ioannis Tsiripidis, Thomas Wohlgemuth and Joerg Ewald, Soil water storage appears to compensate for climatic aridity at the xeric margin of European tree species distribution, European Journal of Forest Research, 10.1007/s10342-017-1092-x, 137, 1, (79-92), (2017).
- Paige E. Copenhaver‐Parry and David M. Bell, Species interactions weakly modify climate‐induced tree co‐occurrence patterns, Journal of Vegetation Science, 29, 1, (52-61), (2018).
- Peter J. Galante, Babatunde Alade, Robert Muscarella, Sharon A. Jansa, Steven M. Goodman and Robert P. Anderson, The challenge of modeling niches and distributions for data‐poor species: a comprehensive approach to model complexity, Ecography, 41, 5, (726-736), (2017).
- Eike Lena Neuschulz, Dominik Merges, Kurt Bollmann, Felix Gugerli and Katrin Böhning‐Gaese, Biotic interactions and seed deposition rather than abiotic factors determine recruitment at elevational range limits of an alpine tree, Journal of Ecology, 106, 3, (948-959), (2017).
- Chongliang Zhang, Yong Chen, Binduo Xu, Ying Xue and Yiping Ren, Comparing the prediction of joint species distribution models with respect to characteristics of sampling data, Ecography, 41, 11, (1876-1887), (2018).
- Damaris Zurell, Laura J. Pollock and Wilfried Thuiller, Do joint species distribution models reliably detect interspecific interactions from co‐occurrence data in homogenous environments?, Ecography, 41, 11, (1812-1819), (2018).
- Hélida F. Cunha, Érica D. Ferreira, Geiziane Tessarolo and João C. Nabout, Host plant distributions and climate interact to affect the predicted geographic distribution of a Neotropical termite, Biotropica, 50, 4, (625-632), (2018).
- Pedro Aragón, Luis M. Carrascal and David Palomino, Macro‐spatial structure of biotic interactions in the distribution of a raptor species, Journal of Biogeography, 45, 8, (1859-1871), (2018).
- Daniel Scherrer, Manuela D'Amen, Rui F. Fernandes, Rubén G. Mateo and Antoine Guisan, How to best threshold and validate stacked species assemblages? Community optimisation might hold the answer, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9, 10, (2155-2166), (2018).
- Carsten F. Dormann, Maria Bobrowski, D. Matthias Dehling, David J. Harris, Florian Hartig, Heike Lischke, Marco D. Moretti, Jörn Pagel, Stefan Pinkert, Matthias Schleuning, Susanne I. Schmidt, Christine S. Sheppard, Manuel J. Steinbauer, Dirk Zeuss and Casper Kraan, Biotic interactions in species distribution modelling: 10 questions to guide interpretation and avoid false conclusions, Global Ecology and Biogeography, 27, 9, (1004-1016), (2018).
- Daniel Paiva Silva, Rebecca M. Dew, Bruno Vilela, Mark I. Stevens and Michael P. Schwarz, No deaths in the desert: predicted responses of an arid‐adapted bee and its two nesting trees suggest resilience in the face of warming climates, Insect Conservation and Diversity, 11, 5, (449-463), (2018).
- Jaime Fagúndez, Canopy height and competition explain species segregation in wet heathlands, Journal of Vegetation Science, 29, 4, (765-774), (2018).
- James P. Herrera, Cortni Borgerson, Lydia Tongasoa, Pascal Andriamahazoarivosoa, B. J. Rodolph Rasolofoniaina, Eli R. Rakotondrafarasata, J. L. Rado Ravoavy Randrianasolo, Steig E. Johnson, Patricia C. Wright and Christopher D. Golden, Estimating the population size of lemurs based on their mutualistic food trees, Journal of Biogeography, 45, 11, (2546-2563), (2018).
- Nasreen Peer, Gavin M. Rishworth, Nelson A.F. Miranda and Renzo Perissinotto, Biophysical drivers of fiddler crab species distribution at a latitudinal limit, Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 10.1016/j.ecss.2018.05.001, 208, (131-139), (2018).
- Ernesto Chanes Rodríguez-Ramírez, Ana Paola Martínez-Falcón and Isolda Luna-Vega, Spatial patterns of Mexican beech seedlings (Fagus grandifolia subsp. mexicana (Martínez) A.E. Murray): influence of canopy openness and conspecific trees on recruitment mechanisms, Annals of Forest Science, 10.1007/s13595-018-0698-6, 75, 1, (2018).
- William Godsoe, Janet Franklin and F. Guillaume Blanchet, Effects of biotic interactions on modeled species' distribution can be masked by environmental gradients, Ecology and Evolution, 7, 2, (654-664), (2016).
- Robert P. Anderson, When and how should biotic interactions be considered in models of species niches and distributions?, Journal of Biogeography, 44, 1, (8-17), (2016).
- Manuela D'Amen, Carsten Rahbek, Niklaus E. Zimmermann and Antoine Guisan, Spatial predictions at the community level: from current approaches to future frameworks, Biological Reviews, 92, 1, (169-187), (2015).
- Rachel C. Putnam and Peter B. Reich, Climate and competition affect growth and survival of transplanted sugar maple seedlings along a 1700‐km gradient, Ecological Monographs, 87, 1, (130-157), (2017).
- Miroslav Dvorský, Martin Macek, Martin Kopecký, Jan Wild and Jiří Doležal, Niche asymmetry of vascular plants increases with elevation, Journal of Biogeography, 44, 6, (1418-1425), (2017).
- Lorenz Walthert and Eliane Seraina Meier, Tree species distribution in temperate forests is more influenced by soil than by climate, Ecology and Evolution, 7, 22, (9473-9484), (2017).
- Pascal I. Hablützel and Jelena H. Pantel, Strong spatial turnover in cichlid fish assemblages in the upper río Madera (Amazon basin) despite the absence of hydrological barriers, Hydrobiologia, 791, 1, (221), (2017).
- Paige E. Copenhaver‐Parry, Bryan N. Shuman and Daniel B. Tinker, Toward an improved conceptual understanding of North American tree species distributions, Ecosphere, 8, 6, (2017).
- Christophe F. Randin, Loïc Pellissier, Antoine Guisan and George Nakhutsrishvili, A Comparison of Climatic Niches of the Same Alpine Plant Species in the Central Caucasus and the Alps, Plant Diversity in the Central Great Caucasus: A Quantitative Assessment, 10.1007/978-3-319-55777-9_5, (133-144), (2017).
- Bruno B. Kubiak, Eliécer E. Gutiérrez, Daniel Galiano, Renan Maestri and Thales R. O. de Freitas, Can Niche Modeling and Geometric Morphometrics Document Competitive Exclusion in a Pair of Subterranean Rodents (Genus Ctenomys) with Tiny Parapatric Distributions?, Scientific Reports, 10.1038/s41598-017-16243-2, 7, 1, (2017).
- Mark Baah-Acheamfour, Charles P.-A. Bourque, Fan-Rui Meng, D. Edwin Swift and Filippos A. Aravanopoulos, Incorporating interspecific competition into species-distribution mapping by upward scaling of small-scale model projections to the landscape, PLOS ONE, 12, 2, (e0171487), (2017).
- Marcello Vitale, Silvia Lorenzetti, Fabio Francesconi, Fabio Attorre and Mario Di Traglia, The importance of interspecific competition in the actual and future distributions of plant species assessed by a 2-D grid agent modelling, Ecological Modelling, 360, (399), (2017).
- Aline Buri, Carmen Cianfrani, Eric Pinto-Figueroa, Erika Yashiro, Jorge E Spangenberg, Thierry Adatte, Eric Verrecchia, Antoine Guisan and Jean-Nicolas Pradervand, Soil factors improve predictions of plant species distribution in a mountain environment, Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 10.1177/0309133317738162, 41, 6, (703-722), (2017).
- Alexander Royan, S. James Reynolds, David M. Hannah, Christel Prudhomme, David G. Noble and Jonathan P. Sadler, Shared environmental responses drive co‐occurrence patterns in river bird communities, Ecography, 39, 8, (733-742), (2015).
- Heidi K. Mod, Daniel Scherrer, Miska Luoto and Antoine Guisan, What we use is not what we know: environmental predictors in plant distribution models, Journal of Vegetation Science, 27, 6, (1308-1322), (2016).
- Clifton P. Mesquita, Andrew J. King, Steven K. Schmidt, Emily C. Farrer and Katharine N. Suding, Incorporating biotic factors in species distribution modeling: are interactions with soil microbes important?, Ecography, 39, 10, (970-980), (2015).
- Jakub Z. Kosicki, Piotr Zduniak, Marta Ostrowska and Martin Hromada, Are predators negative or positive predictors of farmland bird species community on a large geographical scale?, Ecological Indicators, 62, (259), (2016).
- Hamidreza Keshtkar and Winfried Voigt, Potential impacts of climate and landscape fragmentation changes on plant distributions: Coupling multi-temporal satellite imagery with GIS-based cellular automata model, Ecological Informatics, 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2016.02.002, 32, (145-155), (2016).
- Paige E. Copenhaver-Parry, Shannon E. Albeke and Daniel B. Tinker, Do community-level models account for the effects of biotic interactions? A comparison of community-level and species distribution modeling of Rocky Mountain conifers, Plant Ecology, 217, 5, (533), (2016).
- Stella M. Copeland and Susan P. Harrison, Shading and litter mediate the effects of soil fertility on the performance of an understorey herb, Annals of Botany, 10.1093/aob/mcw172, 118, 6, (1187-1198), (2016).
- Alexander Singer, Karin Johst, Thomas Banitz, Mike S. Fowler, Jürgen Groeneveld, Alvaro G. Gutiérrez, Florian Hartig, Rainer M. Krug, Matthias Liess, Glenn Matlack, Katrin M. Meyer, Guy Pe’er, Viktoriia Radchuk, Ana-Johanna Voinopol-Sassu and Justin M.J. Travis, Community dynamics under environmental change: How can next generation mechanistic models improve projections of species distributions?, Ecological Modelling, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.11.007, 326, (63-74), (2016).
- A. Olthoff, C. Martínez-Ruiz and J.G. Alday, Distribution patterns of forest species along an Atlantic-Mediterranean environmental gradient: an approach from forest inventory data, Forestry, 10.1093/forestry/cpv031, 89, 1, (46-54), (2015).
- Heidi K. Mod, Risto K. Heikkinen, Peter C. le Roux, Henry Väre and Miska Luoto, Contrasting effects of biotic interactions on richness and distribution of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens in an arctic–alpine landscape, Polar Biology, 39, 4, (649), (2016).
- Paige E. Copenhaver-Parry and Ellie Cannon, The relative influences of climate and competition on tree growth along montane ecotones in the Rocky Mountains, Oecologia, 10.1007/s00442-016-3565-x, 182, 1, (13-25), (2016).
- Diane R. Menuz, Karin M. Kettenring, Charles P. Hawkins and D. Richard Cutler, Non‐equilibrium in plant distribution models – only an issue for introduced or dispersal limited species?, Ecography, 38, 3, (231-240), (2014).
- Sabela Lois, David E. Cowley, Adolfo Outeiro, Eduardo San Miguel, Rafaela Amaro and Paz Ondina, Spatial extent of biotic interactions affects species distribution and abundance in river networks: the freshwater pearl mussel and its hosts, Journal of Biogeography, 42, 2, (229-240), (2014).
- Karen M. Alofs and Donald A. Jackson, The abiotic and biotic factors limiting establishment of predatory fishes at their expanding northern range boundaries in Ontario, Canada, Global Change Biology, 21, 6, (2227-2237), (2015).
- Diego Nieto‐Lugilde, Jonathan Lenoir, Sylvain Abdulhak, David Aeschimann, Stefan Dullinger, Jean‐Claude Gégout, Antoine Guisan, Harald Pauli, Julien Renaud, Jean‐Paul Theurillat, Wilfried Thuiller, Jérémie Van Es, Pascal Vittoz, Wolfgang Willner, Thomas Wohlgemuth, Niklaus E. Zimmermann and Jens‐Christian Svenning, Tree cover at fine and coarse spatial grains interacts with shade tolerance to shape plant species distributions across the Alps, Ecography, 38, 6, (578-589), (2014).
- Heidi K. Mod, Peter C. le Roux, Antoine Guisan and Miska Luoto, Biotic interactions boost spatial models of species richness, Ecography, 38, 9, (913-921), (2015).
- Jason J. Hamer, Erik J. Veneklaas, Pieter Poot, Karel Mokany and Michael Renton, Shallow environmental gradients put inland species at risk: Insights and implications from predicting future distributions of ucalyptus species in South Western Australia, Austral Ecology, 40, 8, (923-932), (2015).
- M. J. Serra‐Varela, D. Grivet, L. Vincenot, O. Broennimann, J. Gonzalo‐Jiménez and N. E. Zimmermann, Does phylogeographical structure relate to climatic niche divergence? A test using maritime pine (inus pinaster Ait.), Global Ecology and Biogeography, 24, 11, (1302-1313), (2015).
- Belinda J. Davis, Ryan D. Phillips, Magali Wright, Celeste C. Linde and Kingsley W. Dixon, Continent-wide distribution in mycorrhizal fungi: implications for the biogeography of specialized orchids, Annals of Botany, 116, 3, (413), (2015).
- Song Chuangye, Ren Hongxu and Huang Chong, Test the relative importance of biotic and abiotic factors on species distribution – A case study in the Yellow River Delta, Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35, 3, (59), (2015).
- Raúl García-Valdés, Nicholas J. Gotelli, Miguel A. Zavala, Drew W. Purves and Miguel B. Araújo, Effects of climate, species interactions, and dispersal on decadal colonization and extinction rates of Iberian tree species, Ecological Modelling, 309-310, (118), (2015).
- Cinthya A. Ureña-Aranda, Octavio Rojas-Soto, Enrique Martínez-Meyer, Carlos Yáñez-Arenas, Rosario Landgrave Ramírez, Alejandro Espinosa de los Monteros and Rafael Dias Loyola, Using Range-Wide Abundance Modeling to Identify Key Conservation Areas for the Micro-Endemic Bolson Tortoise (Gopherus flavomarginatus), PLOS ONE, 10, 6, (e0131452), (2015).
- Daniel Paiva Silva, Sara Varela, André Nemésio, Paulo De Marco and Helge Thorsten Lumbsch, Adding Biotic Interactions into Paleodistribution Models: A Host-Cleptoparasite Complex of Neotropical Orchid Bees, PLOS ONE, 10, 6, (e0129890), (2015).
- Miguel B. Araújo and Alejandro Rozenfeld, The geographic scaling of biotic interactions, Ecography, 37, 5, (406-415), (2014).
- Carlos B. Araújo, Luiz Octavio Marcondes‐Machado and Gabriel C. Costa, The importance of biotic interactions in species distribution models: a test of the Eltonian noise hypothesis using parrots, Journal of Biogeography, 41, 3, (513-523), (2013).
- Jennifer M. Fraterrigo, Stephanie Wagner and Robert J. Warren, Local‐scale biotic interactions embedded in macroscale climate drivers suggest Eltonian noise hypothesis distribution patterns for an invasive grass, Ecology Letters, 17, 11, (1447-1454), (2014).
- Anett Schibalski, Aleksi Lehtonen and Boris Schröder, Climate change shifts environmental space and limits transferability of treeline models, Ecography, 37, 4, (321-335), (2013).
- Laura J. Pollock, Reid Tingley, William K. Morris, Nick Golding, Robert B. O'Hara, Kirsten M. Parris, Peter A. Vesk and Michael A. McCarthy, Understanding co‐occurrence by modelling species simultaneously with a Joint Species Distribution Model (JSDM), Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 5, 5, (397-406), (2014).
- Anne M. Trainor, Oswald J. Schmitz, Jacob S. Ivan and Tanya M. Shenk, Enhancing species distribution modeling by characterizing predator–prey interactions, Ecological Applications, 24, 1, (204-216), (2014).
- S. Normand, N. E. Zimmermann, F. M. Schurr and H. Lischke, Demography as the basis for understanding and predicting range dynamics, Ecography, 37, 12, (1149-1154), (2014).
- Eliane S. Meier, Stefan Dullinger, Niklaus E. Zimmermann, Daniel Baumgartner, Andreas Gattringer and Karl Hülber, Space matters when defining effective management for invasive plants, Diversity and Distributions, 20, 9, (1029-1043), (2014).
- Boulangeat Isabelle, Georges Damien and Thuiller Wilfried, FATE‐HD: a spatially and temporally explicit integrated model for predicting vegetation structure and diversity at regional scale, Global Change Biology, 20, 7, (2368-2378), (2014).
- Diego F. Alvarado‐Serrano and L. Lacey Knowles, Ecological niche models in phylogeographic studies: applications, advances and precautions, Molecular Ecology Resources, 14, 2, (233-248), (2013).
- Jan Hanspach, Oliver Schweiger, Ingolf Kühn, Matthias Plattner, Peter B. Pearman, Niklaus E. Zimmermann and Josef Settele, Host plant availability potentially limits butterfly distributions under cold environmental conditions, Ecography, 37, 3, (301-308), (2013).
- Anne M. Trainor and Oswald J. Schmitz, Infusing considerations of trophic dependencies into species distribution modelling, Ecology Letters, 17, 12, (1507-1517), (2014).
- Daniel P. Silva, Victor H. Gonzalez, Gabriel A.R. Melo, Mariano Lucia, Leopoldo J. Alvarez and Paulo De Marco, Seeking the flowers for the bees: Integrating biotic interactions into niche models to assess the distribution of the exotic bee species Lithurgus huberi in South America, Ecological Modelling, 273, (200), (2014).
- Golo Stadelmann, Harald Bugmann, Beat Wermelinger and Christof Bigler, Spatial interactions between storm damage and subsequent infestations by the European spruce bark beetle, Forest Ecology and Management, 318, (167), (2014).
- Karin Y. van Ewijk, Christophe F. Randin, Paul M. Treitz and Neal A. Scott, Predicting fine-scale tree species abundance patterns using biotic variables derived from LiDAR and high spatial resolution imagery, Remote Sensing of Environment, 150, (120), (2014).
- Hagen S. Fischer, Barbara Michler and Jörg Ewald, Environmental, Spatial and Structural Components in the Composition of Mountain Forest in the Bavarian Alps, Folia Geobotanica, 49, 3, (361), (2014).
- Youhua Chen, Sarah L. Amundrud and Diane S. Srivastava, Spatial variance in soil microarthropod communities: Niche, neutrality, or stochasticity?, Écoscience, 21, 3-4, (405), (2014).
- Andrew Park, Klaus Puettmann, Edward Wilson, Christian Messier, Susanne Kames and Amalesh Dhar, Can Boreal and Temperate Forest Management be Adapted to the Uncertainties of 21st Century Climate Change?, Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, 10.1080/07352689.2014.858956, 33, 4, (251-285), (2014).
- Jiajia Liu, Tan Yunhong and J.W. Ferry Slik, Topography related habitat associations of tree species traits, composition and diversity in a Chinese tropical forest, Forest Ecology and Management, 10.1016/j.foreco.2014.06.045, 330, (75-81), (2014).
- Steven Delean, C. Michael Bull, Barry W. Brook, Lee M. B. Heard and Damien A. Fordham, Using plant distributions to predict the current and future range of a rare lizard, Diversity and Distributions, 19, 9, (1125-1137), (2013).
- Jill E. Jankowski, Gustavo A. Londoño, Scott K. Robinson and Mark A. Chappell, Exploring the role of physiology and biotic interactions in determining elevational ranges of tropical animals, Ecography, 36, 1, (1-12), (2012).
- Alexandre Mestre, Josep A. Aguilar‐Alberola, David Baldry, Husamettin Balkis, Adam Ellis, Jose A. Gil‐Delgado, Karsten Grabow, Göran Klobučar, Antonín Kouba, Ivana Maguire, Andreas Martens, Ayşegül Mülayim, Juan Rueda, Burkhard Scharf, Menno Soes, Juan S. Monrós and Francesc Mesquita‐Joanes, Invasion biology in non‐free‐living species: interactions between abiotic (climatic) and biotic (host availability) factors in geographical space in crayfish commensals (Ostracoda, Entocytheridae), Ecology and Evolution, 3, 16, (5237-5253), (2013).
- Mary Susanne Wisz, Julien Pottier, W. Daniel Kissling, Loïc Pellissier, Jonathan Lenoir, Christian F. Damgaard, Carsten F. Dormann, Mads C. Forchhammer, John‐Arvid Grytnes, Antoine Guisan, Risto K. Heikkinen, Toke T. Høye, Ingolf Kühn, Miska Luoto, Luigi Maiorano, Marie‐Charlotte Nilsson, Signe Normand, Erik Öckinger, Niels M. Schmidt, Mette Termansen, Allan Timmermann, David A. Wardle, Peter Aastrup and Jens‐Christian Svenning, The role of biotic interactions in shaping distributions and realised assemblages of species: implications for species distribution modelling, Biological Reviews, 88, 1, (15-30), (2012).
- Brian Oney, Björn Reineking, Gregory O'Neill and Juergen Kreyling, Intraspecific variation buffers projected climate change impacts on Pinus contorta, Ecology and Evolution, 3, 2, (437-449), (2013).
- Golo Stadelmann, Harald Bugmann, Beat Wermelinger, Franz Meier and Christof Bigler, A predictive framework to assess spatio‐temporal variability of infestations by the European spruce bark beetle, Ecography, 36, 11, (1208-1217), (2013).
- Bradley Z. Carlson, Christophe F. Randin, Isabelle Boulangeat, Sébastien Lavergne, Wilfried Thuiller and Philippe Choler, Working toward integrated models of alpine plant distribution, Alpine Botany, 10.1007/s00035-013-0117-4, 123, 2, (41-53), (2013).
- Poppy Lakeman-Fraser and Robert M. Ewers, Enemy release promotes range expansion in a host plant, Oecologia, 172, 4, (1203), (2013).
- F. Lloret, J. Martinez-Vilalta, J. M. Serra-Diaz and M. Ninyerola, Relationship between projected changes in future climatic suitability and demographic and functional traits of forest tree species in Spain, Climatic Change, 10.1007/s10584-013-0820-6, 120, 1-2, (449-462), (2013).
- Lorenz Walthert, Elisabeth Graf Pannatier and Eliane S. Meier, Shortage of nutrients and excess of toxic elements in soils limit the distribution of soil-sensitive tree species in temperate forests, Forest Ecology and Management, 297, (94), (2013).
- M. J. L. Peers, D. H. Thornton and D. L. Murray, Evidence for large-scale effects of competition: niche displacement in Canada lynx and bobcat, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280, 1773, (20132495), (2013).
- Angela Taboada, Henrik von Wehrden, Thorsten Assmann and Robert B. Srygley, Integrating Life Stages into Ecological Niche Models: A Case Study on Tiger Beetles, PLoS ONE, 8, 7, (e70038), (2013).
- David J. Ensing, Chandra E. Moffat and Jason Pither, Taxonomic identification errors generate misleading ecological niche model predictions of an invasive hawkweed, Botany, 91, 3, (137), (2013).
- Eliane S. Meier, Heike Lischke, Dirk R. Schmatz and Niklaus E. Zimmermann, Climate, competition and connectivity affect future migration and ranges of European trees, Global Ecology and Biogeography, 21, 2, (164-178), (2011).
- Romain Bertrand, Vincent Perez and Jean‐Claude Gégout, Disregarding the edaphic dimension in species distribution models leads to the omission of crucial spatial information under climate change: the case of uercus pubescens in France, Global Change Biology, 18, 8, (2648-2660), (2012).
- Miguel B. Araújo and A. Townsend Peterson, Uses and misuses of bioclimatic envelope modeling, Ecology, 93, 7, (1527-1539), (2012).
- Alissar Cheaib, Vincent Badeau, Julien Boe, Isabelle Chuine, Christine Delire, Eric Dufrêne, Christophe François, Emmanuel S. Gritti, Myriam Legay, Christian Pagé, Wilfried Thuiller, Nicolas Viovy and Paul Leadley, Climate change impacts on tree ranges: model intercomparison facilitates understanding and quantification of uncertainty, Ecology Letters, 15, 6, (533-544), (2012).
- Joshua A. Banta, Ian M. Ehrenreich, Silvia Gerard, Lucy Chou, Amity Wilczek, Johanna Schmitt, Paula X. Kover and Michael D. Purugganan, Climate envelope modelling reveals intraspecific relationships among flowering phenology, niche breadth and potential range size in , Ecology Letters, 15, 8, (769-777), (2012).
- Tiago S. Vasconcelos, Miguel Á Rodríguez and Bradford A. Hawkins, Species distribution modelling as a macroecological tool: a case study using New World amphibians, Ecography, 35, 6, (539-548), (2011).
- W. D. Kissling, Carsten F. Dormann, Jürgen Groeneveld, Thomas Hickler, Ingolf Kühn, Greg J. McInerny, José M. Montoya, Christine Römermann, Katja Schiffers, Frank M. Schurr, Alexander Singer, Jens‐Christian Svenning, Niklaus E. Zimmermann and Robert B. O’Hara, Towards novel approaches to modelling biotic interactions in multispecies assemblages at large spatial extents, Journal of Biogeography, 39, 12, (2163-2178), (2011).
- Isabelle Boulangeat, Dominique Gravel and Wilfried Thuiller, Accounting for dispersal and biotic interactions to disentangle the drivers of species distributions and their abundances, Ecology Letters, 15, 6, (584-593), (2012).
- Andrew Park and Carolyn Talbot, Assisted migration: uncertainty, risk and opportunity, The Forestry Chronicle, 10.5558/tfc2012-077, 88, 04, (412-419), (2012).
- J. Brodie, E. Post, F. Watson and J. Berger, Climate change intensification of herbivore impacts on tree recruitment, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279, 1732, (1366), (2012).
- Miguel B. Araújo, Alejandro Rozenfeld, Carsten Rahbek and Pablo A. Marquet, Using species co‐occurrence networks to assess the impacts of climate change, Ecography, 34, 6, (897-908), (2011).
- Taryn L. Morris, Karen J. Esler, Nichole N. Barger, Shayne M. Jacobs and Michael D. Cramer, Ecophysiological traits associated with the competitive ability of invasive Australian acacias, Diversity and Distributions, 17, 5, (898-910), (2011).
- Eliane S. Meier, Thomas C. Edwards Jr, Felix Kienast, Matthias Dobbertin and Niklaus E. Zimmermann, Co-occurrence patterns of trees along macro-climatic gradients and their potential influence on the present and future distribution of Fagus sylvatica L., Journal of Biogeography, 38, 2, (371), (2011).
- David Palomino, Luis M. Carrascal and Jaime Potti, Distribution of Azure-Winged Magpies Cyanopica cooki in Spain: Both Local and Large-Scale Factors Considered , Acta Ornithologica, 10.3161/000164511X589947, 46, 1, (71-82), (2011).
- Jens-Christian Svenning, Camilla Fløjgaard, Katharine A. Marske, David Nógues-Bravo and Signe Normand, Applications of species distribution modeling to paleobiology, Quaternary Science Reviews, 30, 21-22, (2930), (2011).
- Peter B. Pearman, Manuela D'Amen, Catherine H. Graham, Wilfried Thuiller and Niklaus E. Zimmermann, Within‐taxon niche structure: niche conservatism, divergence and predicted effects of climate change, Ecography, 33, 6, (990-1003), (2010).
- Loïc Pellissier, Kari Anne Bråthen, Julien Pottier, Christophe F. Randin, Pascal Vittoz, Anne Dubuis, Nigel G. Yoccoz, Torbjørn Alm, Niklaus E. Zimmermann and Antoine Guisan, Species distribution models reveal apparent competitive and facilitative effects of a dominant species on the distribution of tundra plants, Ecography, 33, 6, (1004-1014), (2010).
- Niklaus E. Zimmermann, Thomas C. Edwards, Catherine H. Graham, Peter B. Pearman and Jens‐Christian Svenning, New trends in species distribution modelling, Ecography, 33, 6, (985-989), (2010).
- Jesse S. Lewis, Matthew L. Farnsworth, Chris L. Burdett, David M. Theobald, Miranda Gray and Ryan S. Miller, Biotic and abiotic factors predicting the global distribution and population density of an invasive large mammal, Scientific Reports, 10.1038/srep44152, 7, (44152), (2017).
- Raluca Vodă, Leonardo Dapporto, Vlad Dincă and Roger Vila, Why Do Cryptic Species Tend Not to Co-Occur? A Case Study on Two Cryptic Pairs of Butterflies, PLOS ONE, 10.1371/journal.pone.0117802, 10, 2, (e0117802), (2015).
- Xavier Arnan, Nico Blüthgen, Roberto Molowny-Horas and Javier Retana, Thermal Characterization of European Ant Communities Along Thermal Gradients and Its Implications for Community Resilience to Temperature Variability, Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 10.3389/fevo.2015.00138, 3, (2015).
- Marianna V.P. Simões and A. Townsend Peterson, Importance of biotic predictors in estimation of potential invasive areas: the example of the tortoise beetle Eurypedus nigrosignatus , in Hispaniola , PeerJ, 10.7717/peerj.6052, 6, (e6052), (2018).
- David G. Olson and Lynne K. Rieske, Host range expansion may provide enemy free space for the highly invasive emerald ash borer, Biological Invasions, 10.1007/s10530-018-1853-6, (2018).
