| Literature DB >> 27467269 |
Anaïs Charbonnel1,2,3, Pascal Laffaille2,4, Marjorie Biffi2,3, Frédéric Blanc1, Anthony Maire2,3, Mélanie Némoz1, José Miguel Sanchez-Perez2,4, Sabine Sauvage2,4, Laëtitia Buisson2,3.
Abstract
Species distribution models (SDMs) are the main tool to predict global change impacts on species ranges. Climate change alone is frequently considered, but in freshwater ecosystems, hydrology is a key driver of the ecology of aquatic species. At large scale, hydrology is however rarely accounted for, owing to the lack of detailed stream flow data. In this study, we developed an integrated modelling approach to simulate stream flow using the hydrological Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT). Simulated stream flow was subsequently included as an input variable in SDMs along with topographic, hydrographic, climatic and land-cover descriptors. SDMs were applied to two temporally-distinct surveys of the distribution of the endangered Pyrenean desman (Galemys pyrenaicus) in the French Pyrenees: a historical one conducted from 1985 to 1992 and a current one carried out between 2011 and 2013. The model calibrated on historical data was also forecasted onto the current period to assess its ability to describe the distributional change of the Pyrenean desman that has been modelled in the recent years. First, we found that hydrological and climatic variables were the ones influencing the most the distribution of this species for both periods, emphasizing the importance of taking into account hydrology when SDMs are applied to aquatic species. Secondly, our results highlighted a strong range contraction of the Pyrenean desman in the French Pyrenees over the last 25 years. Given that this range contraction was under-estimated when the historical model was forecasted onto current conditions, this finding suggests that other drivers may be interacting with climate, hydrology and land-use changes. Our results imply major concerns for the conservation of this endemic semi-aquatic mammal since changes in climate and hydrology are expected to become more intense in the future.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27467269 PMCID: PMC4965056 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159941
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Methodology used to build the historical, forecasted and current distribution models for the Pyrenean desman in the French Pyrenees.
Modified from [9, 63].
Measured changes in the environmental variables between historical and current periods across the French Pyrenees.
| Variable | Historical | Current | Range change (%) | Mean change ± sd (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
For climatic (TEM, RAI) and stream flow (FLO) variables, the historical and current periods correspond to 1976–1985 and 2002–2011, respectively whereas they correspond to 1990 and 2006 for land-use variables. The values given in the second and the third columns show the average conditions across the study area.
Fig 2Occurrence probabilities of the Pyrenean desman predicted across the French Pyrenean stream network.
(a) historical, (b) forecasted and (c) current models.
Fig 3Relative contribution (%) of each environmental variable in the models for the two periods.
The historical period is depicted in grey while the current period is shown in white. Barplots indicate the mean importance (± standard error) across the six modelling methods. The environmental variables are sorted by decreasing importance for the current period.
Fig 4Response curves of the most relevant environmental variables influencing the distribution of the Pyrenean desman.
Response curves for the historical predictions are depicted in grey while those for the current prediction are shown in black. Solid lines indicate the mean response across the six statistical models while dotted lines represent the 95% confidence intervals. All non-categorical covariates were log-transformed and normalized.
Fig 5Percentage of change in predicted occurrence probabilities of the Pyrenean desman.
Percentage of change between (a) the historical and forecasted models (i.e. expected range change), (b) the current and forecasted models, and (c) the historical and current models (i.e. modelled range change).
Fig 6Distribution of occurrence probabilities changes.
Changes between the historical and forecasted models (i.e. expected range change) are shown in dark grey, the ones between the forecasted and current models in light grey, and the ones between historical and current models (i.e. modelled range change) in white.