| Literature DB >> 23300954 |
Adam E Vorsino1, Cynthia B King, William P Haines, Daniel Rubinoff.
Abstract
Survey data over the last 100 years indicate that populations of the endemic Hawaiian leafroller moth, Omiodes continuatalis (Wallengren) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae), have declined, and the species is extirpated from large portions of its original range. Declines have been attributed largely to the invasion of non-native parasitoid species into Hawaiian ecosystems. To quantify changes in O. continuatalis distribution, we applied the maximum entropy modeling approach using Maxent. The model referenced historical (1892-1967) and current (2004-2008) survey data, to create predictive habitat suitability maps which illustrate the probability of occurrence of O. continuatalis based on historical data as contrasted with recent survey results. Probability of occurrence is predicted based on the association of biotic (vegetation) and abiotic (proxy of precipitation, proxy of temperature, elevation) environmental factors with 141 recent and historic survey locations, 38 of which O. continuatalis were collected from. Models built from the historical and recent surveys suggest habitat suitable for O. continuatalis has changed significantly over time, decreasing both in quantity and quality. We reference these data to examine the potential effects of non-native parasitoids as a factor in changing habitat suitability and range contraction for O. continuatalis. Synthesis and applications: Our results suggest that the range of O. continuatalis, an endemic Hawaiian species of conservation concern, has shrunk as its environment has degraded. Although few range shifts have been previously demonstrated in insects, such contractions caused by pressure from introduced species may be important factors in insect extinctions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23300954 PMCID: PMC3534676 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051885
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Map of historic and current O. continuatalis presence localities collected from around the Hawaiian Islands, as well as light trap collection localities where O. continuatalis were not observed during current surveys.
These points were used to develop the Ecological Niche Models for each time period.
An overview of the environmental variables used to define the ENM for O. continuatalis.
| Description | Source | Ecological Relevance | Variable type | Citation | |
|
| DEM: 10 meter digital elevation model of the Hawaiian Islands |
| Elevation is directly correlated in the distribution of many native and non-native insects and is definitive of microhabitat use | Continuous/Abiotic |
|
|
| Hawaii USGS 30 meter LANDFIRE Analysis Vegetation map |
| Existing Vegetation Type analysis conducted for the Hawaiian Islands describing vegetation ecotypes based on canopy height and cover. It can used as a relatively large scale predictor of biotic trends | Categorical/Biotic |
|
|
| The first Eigenvector of a Principal Component Analysis of current (1950–2000) temperature |
| Descriptive of the variance in temperature as described by the first eigenvector of Bioclimatic variables 1–12. Using this descriptor as a variable reduces multi-colinearity (redundancy). | Continuous/Abiotic |
|
|
| The first Eigenvector of a Principal Component Analysis of current (1950–2000) precipitation |
| Descriptive of the variance in precipitation as described by the first eigenvector of Bioclimatic variables 13–19. Using this descriptor as a variable reduces multi-colinearity (redundancy). | Continuous/Abiotic |
|
|
| The first Eigenvector of a Principal Component Analysis of future (2050) temperature inferred from the GFLD 2.1 climate model A2a emission scenario. |
| Used the same Bioclimatic variables as the current PCAtemp. A model evaluation conducted by Irving | Continuous/Abiotic |
|
|
| The first Eigenvector of a Principal Component Analysis of future (2050) temperature inferred from the GFLD 2.1 climate model for the A2a emission scenario. |
| Used the same Bioclimatic variables as the current PCAprecip. A model evaluation conducted by Irving | Continuous/Abiotic |
|
Figure 2The Ecological Niche Models (ENM) defined in Maxent showing the distribution of O. continuatialis as collected from 2004 to 2010 and projected onto a set of biotic and abiotic variables.
The figure shows the current ENM (A) along with that of the ENM projected into 2050 (B). The 2050 GFDL 2.1 climate change model was used to derive projected future climate variables. As compared to the current distribution (A) the 2050 projected distribution (B) shows an expansion of suitable habitat area (see Table 4).
Figure 3The Ecological Niche Models (ENM) defined in Maxent showing the distribution of O. continuatialis as collected from 1892 to 1967 and projected onto a set of biotic and abiotic variables.
The figure shows the historically defined ENM (A) along with that of the ENM projected 2050 (B). The 2050 GFDL 2.1 climate change model was used to derive projected future climate variables. As compared to the historic distribution (A) the 2050 projected distribution of historic data (B) shows an expansion of suitable habitat area (see Table 4). Although the trend of habitat expansion is similar to the contemporary (current and projected) models, the overall model prediction differs significantly (Table 2).
The area of suitable habitat (locations with an HSI>50%) per island per ENM in km2, the difference in these scenarios as compared between current and historic distributions, and their future (2050) projections.
| Area of Suitable Habitat (>50% HSI) per Analysis (km2) | Current Climate Models | 2050 Future Climate Models | ||||||
| Island | Historic ENM | Historic Projection | Contemp. ENM | Contemp.Projection | Δ Habitat Area (Contemp.-Historic) | % Δ Area | Δ Projected Habitat Area (Contemp.-Historic) | % Δ Area |
|
| 4.69 | 173.39 | 0.04 | 0 | −4.65 | −99.14 | −173.39 | −100 |
|
| 575.47 | 1036.34 | 0 | 0 | −575.47 | −100 | −1036.34 | −100 |
|
| 224.54 | 416.76 | 0 | 0 | −224.54 | −100 | −416.76 | −100 |
|
| 55.58 | 82.28 | 0 | 0 | −55.58 | −100 | −82.28 | −100 |
|
| 15.61 | 17.31 | 0.07 | 10.4 | −15.54 | −99.55 | −6.91 | −39.92 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 5.62 | 1.3 | +5.62 | +>100 | +1.3 | +>100 |
|
| 68.33 | 83.65 | 11.29 | 106.56 | −57.04 | −83.47 | +22.91 | +27.39 |
|
| 6.06 | 5.608 | 0.01 | 59.98 | −6.05 | −99.83 | +54.372 | +969.5 |
|
| 950.28 | 1815.34 | 17.03 | 178.24 | −933.25 | −98.21 | −1637.098 | −90.18 |
The change (Δ) in habitat area is defined here by both percent change (%Δ Area) and the differences in the modeled ENMs. Totals are also defined to describe each distribution/projection in relation to the total area involved (all of the islands). The analysis indicates a large reduction in suitable habitat, though future projections of both current and historic O. continuatalis distributions indicate a habitat expansion.
Niche comparison metrics as calculated in ENMtools.
| Range Overlap | |||
| Contemporary Projection | Historic Analysis | Historic Projection | |
| Contemporary Analysis | 0.6228 | 0.0000 | 0.0071 |
| Contemporary Projection | – | 0.1249 | 0.1498 |
| Historic Analysis | – | – | 0.9978 |
| Relative Rank | |||
| Contemporary Projection | Historic Analysis | Historic Projection | |
| Contemporary Analysis | 0.8855 | 0.4896* | 0.4881 |
| Contemporary Projection | – | 0.4252 | 0.4257* |
| Historic Analysis | – | – | 0.9674 |
| Niche Overlap ( | |||
| Contemporary Projection | Historic Analysis | Historic Projection | |
|
| 0.9840 | 0.8252 (n.s.) | 0.8316 |
|
| – | 0.7990 | 0.8068* |
|
| – | – | 0.9992 |
Here the range overlap (difference in ranges between time periods), relative rank overlap (difference in habitat pairing between time periods), and niche overlap (I) (pairwise niche overlap between time points) metrics are shown. The results (significance or non-significance) of the identity test are also given for each applicable comparison (Relative Rank and Niche Overlap). Due to the nature of the identity test we could only compare point distributions under either the current or the future climate model, as such only two comparisons per model were conducted. Significance of the identity test (p<0.05) is indicated by “*”, whereas non-significance (p>0.05) is indicated by “n.s.”. The analysis indicates highly divergent Historic and Contemporary (current and projected) distributions of O. continuatalis.
The Levin's Niche breadth analysis outputs a scale of specialization between 0 and 1, where “0” is a specialist and “1” is a generalist.
| Niche Breadth | |
| B1 (inverse concentration) | |
|
| 0.5067 |
|
| 0.5444 |
|
| 0.6149 |
|
| 0.6451 |
Here, niche breadth is used as a measure of the association to the environmental variables over time. Interestingly, the contemporary current and projected distribution of O. continuatalis shows lower niche specificity than does the historic distribution.