Effects of climate change on the distribution of ecologically interacting species: butterflies and their main food plants in Spain

Global climatic change exerts a generalised impact on species ranges, which could be problematic if ecologically-related species differ in their geographical response to climate change. Therefore, a combination of distribution modelling protocols is required to predict the future impacts of global warming on sets of different ecologically-dependent species. We test the extent to which the predicted future distributions of Spanish monophagous butterfly species, as estimated on the basis of climatic and physiographic variables, would differ depending on whether the geographic distribution of their larval food plants was taken into account or not. Using the favourability function as the modelling tool and fuzzy logic to combine butterfly and plant models, we extrapolated climatic favourability models for the butterfly, the plant and the butterfly–plant combination to the periods 2011–2040, 2041–2070, 2071–2100. All the models obtained were significant and the predicted butterfly–plant interactions indicated that larval food plants will represent in the future a greater constraint on butterfly species distributions. Climatic favourability for butterflies was expected to increase in the future more than the climatic favourability for the food plants. The plant data had relevant effects on the predicted future ranges of butterflies, which were generally expected to contract due to the effect of climate change on the plant. This highlights the view that opposite to recent results stating that climate is the primary driving force of butterfly distributions in Europe, variables other than those directly related to climate may exert a leading role in the near future. These include direct biotic interactions such as dependence on host plants, at least for highly specialised (monophagous) species of phytophagous insects.

[1]  J. Biesmeijer,et al.  Improving species distribution models using biotic interactions: a case study of parasites, pollinators and plants , 2013 .

[2]  R. Real,et al.  Estimating How Inflated or Obscured Effects of Climate Affect Forecasted Species Distribution , 2013, PloS one.

[3]  W. D. Kissling,et al.  The role of biotic interactions in shaping distributions and realised assemblages of species: implications for species distribution modelling , 2012, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[4]  F. D. Pineda,et al.  Changes in tree species composition in Mediterranean mountains under climate change: Indicators for conservation planning , 2013 .

[5]  R. Real,et al.  Favourability: concept, distinctive characteristics and potential usefulness , 2012, Naturwissenschaften.

[6]  C. Nilsson,et al.  How biotic interactions may alter future predictions of species distributions: future threats to the persistence of the arctic fox in Fennoscandia , 2012 .

[7]  F. Jiguet,et al.  Differences in the climatic debts of birds and butterflies at a continental scale , 2012 .

[8]  T. Hickler,et al.  Increasing range mismatching of interacting species under global change is related to their ecological characteristics , 2012 .

[9]  Disentangling the paradox of insect phenology: are temporal trends reflecting the response to warming? , 2012, Oecologia.

[10]  J. Peñuelas,et al.  Determinants of species richness in generalist and specialist Mediterranean butterflies: the negative synergistic forces of climate and habitat change , 2011 .

[11]  R. Real,et al.  Combining climate with other influential factors for modelling the impact of climate change on species distribution , 2011 .

[12]  C. Stefanescu,et al.  Recent trends in butterfly populations from north-east Spain and Andorra in the light of habitat and climate change , 2011, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[13]  W. D. Kissling,et al.  Woody plants and the prediction of climate-change impacts on bird diversity , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[14]  Robert D Holt,et al.  A framework for community interactions under climate change. , 2010, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[15]  Raimundo Real,et al.  Species distribution models in climate change scenarios are still not useful for informing policy planning: an uncertainty assessment using fuzzy logic , 2010 .

[16]  E. García‐Barros,et al.  The relationship between geographic range size and life history traits: is biogeographic history uncovered? A test using the Iberian butterflies , 2010 .

[17]  J. Settele,et al.  European Red List of Butterflies , 2010 .

[18]  J. Settele,et al.  Assessing the vulnerability of European butterflies to climate change using multiple criteria , 2010, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[19]  Tim Newbold,et al.  Climate‐based models of spatial patterns of species richness in Egypt’s butterfly and mammal fauna , 2009 .

[20]  Miguel Delibes,et al.  Conservation biogeography of ecologically interacting species: the case of the Iberian lynx and the European rabbit , 2009 .

[21]  F. Jiguet,et al.  Birds are tracking climate warming, but not fast enough , 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[22]  Ingolf Kühn,et al.  Climate change can cause spatial mismatch of trophically interacting species. , 2008, Ecology.

[23]  J. Rotenberry,et al.  Habitat shifts of endangered species under altered climate conditions: importance of biotic interactions , 2008 .

[24]  Gretchen G. Moisen,et al.  A comparison of the performance of threshold criteria for binary classification in terms of predicted prevalence and Kappa , 2008 .

[25]  José Carlos Brito,et al.  Modelling habitat selection of Common Cranes Grus grus wintering in Portugal using multiple logistic regression , 2008 .

[26]  J. Lobo,et al.  Challenging Species Distribution Models: The Case of Maculinea nausithous in the Iberian Peninsula , 2008 .

[27]  J. Hanspach,et al.  Climatic Risk Atlas of European Butterflies , 2008 .

[28]  R. Real,et al.  AUC: a misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models , 2008 .

[29]  M. Luoto,et al.  Biotic interactions improve prediction of boreal bird distributions at macro‐scales , 2007 .

[30]  M. Araújo,et al.  The importance of biotic interactions for modelling species distributions under climate change , 2007 .

[31]  Vincent R. Gray Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis Summary for Policymakers , 2007 .

[32]  C. Graham,et al.  The ability of climate envelope models to predict the effect of climate change on species distributions , 2006 .

[33]  Jorge M. Lobo,et al.  Identifying recorder-induced geographic bias in an Iberian butterfly database , 2006 .

[34]  C. Parmesan Ecological and Evolutionary Responses to Recent Climate Change , 2006 .

[35]  M. Luoto,et al.  Determinants of the biogeographical distribution of butterflies in boreal regions , 2006 .

[36]  E. Beltrán Corología actualizada de Charaxes jasius (Linnaeus, 1767) en Aragón (España) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) , 2006 .

[37]  A. Márcia Barbosa,et al.  Obtaining Environmental Favourability Functions from Logistic Regression , 2006, Environmental and Ecological Statistics.

[38]  A. Márcia Barbosa,et al.  Modelling the distribution of Bonelli's eagle in Spain: implications for conservation planning , 2005 .

[39]  D. Gutiérrez,et al.  Changes to the elevational limits and extent of species ranges associated with climate change. , 2005, Ecology letters.

[40]  Lluis Serra i Laliga Estudio crítico de la flora vascular de la provincia de Alicante: aspectos nomenclaturales, biogeográficos y de conservación , 2005 .

[41]  A. Palmer,et al.  A fuzzy classification technique for predicting species’ distributions: applications using invasive alien plants and indigenous insects , 2004 .

[42]  S. Herrando,et al.  Butterfly species richness in the north‐west Mediterranean Basin: the role of natural and human‐induced factors , 2004 .

[43]  B. A. Hawkins,et al.  Water–energy balance and the geographic pattern of species richness of western Palearctic butterflies , 2003 .

[44]  J. Peñuelas,et al.  Effects of climatic change on the phenology of butterflies in the northwest Mediterranean Basin , 2003 .

[45]  T. Dawson,et al.  Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? , 2003 .

[46]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[47]  A. Márcia Barbosa,et al.  Relative importance of environment, human activity and spatial situation in determining the distribution of terrestrial mammal diversity in Argentina , 2003 .

[48]  Constantino Stefanescu,et al.  Guía de las mariposas de España y Europa , 2002 .

[49]  Ángel M. Felicísimo Modeling the Potential Distribution of Forests with a GIS , 2002 .

[50]  E. Fleishman,et al.  Modeling and Predicting Species Occurrence Using Broad‐Scale Environmental Variables: an Example with Butterflies of the Great Basin , 2001 .

[51]  J. K. Hill,et al.  Rapid responses of British butterflies to opposing forces of climate and habitat change , 2001, Nature.

[52]  T. Farr,et al.  Shuttle radar topography mission produces a wealth of data , 2000 .

[53]  Simon Ferrier,et al.  Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression , 2000 .

[54]  S. Ferrier,et al.  An evaluation of alternative algorithms for fitting species distribution models using logistic regression , 2000 .

[55]  M. Willig,et al.  Impacts of extreme weather and climate on terrestrial biota , 2000 .

[56]  F. Kienast,et al.  Predicting the potential distribution of plant species in an alpine environment , 1998 .

[57]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[58]  E. Bernays,et al.  Host-Plant Selection by Phytophagous Insects , 1994, Contemporary Topics in Entomology.

[59]  P. Legendre Spatial Autocorrelation: Trouble or New Paradigm? , 1993 .

[60]  Claire Kremen,et al.  Assessing the Indicator Properties of Species Assemblages for Natural Areas Monitoring. , 1992, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[61]  D. Hosmer,et al.  Applied Logistic Regression , 1991 .

[62]  V. Flack,et al.  Frequency of Selecting Noise Variables in Subset Regression Analysis: A Simulation Study , 1987 .