Abstract
Contemporary climate change is causing large shifts in biotic distributions1, which has the potential to bring previously isolated, closely related species into contact2. This has led to concern that hybridization and competition could threaten species persistence3. Here, we use bioclimatic models to show that future range overlap by the end of the century is predicted for only 6.4% of isolated, congeneric species pairs of New World birds, mammals and amphibians. Projected rates of climate-induced overlap are higher for birds (11.6%) than for mammals (4.4%) or amphibians (3.6%). As many species will have difficulty tracking shifting climates4, actual rates of future overlap are likely to be far lower, suggesting that hybridization and competition impacts may be relatively modest.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chen, I. C., Hill, J. K., Ohlemüller, R., Roy, D. B. & Thomas, C. D. Rapid range shifts of species associated with high levels of climate warming. Science 333, 1024–1026 (2011).
Chunco, A. Hybridization in a warmer world. Ecol. Evol. 4, 2019–2031 (2014).
Kelly, B. P., Whiteley, A. & Tallmon, D. The arctic melting pot. Nature 468, 891 (2010).
Schloss, C. A., Nunez, T. A. & Lawler, J. J. Dispersal will limit ability of mammals to track climate change in the Western Hemisphere. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 8606–8611 (2012).
Williams, J. W. & Jackson, S. T. Novel climates, no-analog communities, and ecological surprises. Front. Ecol. Environ. 5, 475–482 (2007).
Walther, G. R. et al. Ecological responses to recent climate change. Nature 416, 389–395 (2002).
Jankowski, J. E., Robinson, S. K. & Levey, D. J. Squeezed at the top: Interspecific aggression may constrain elevational ranges in tropical birds. Ecology 91, 1877–1884 (2010).
Urban, M. C., Tewksbury, J. J. & Sheldon, K. S. On a collision course: Competition and dispersal differences create no-analogue communities and cause extinctions during climate change. Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 2072–2080 (2012).
Rhymer, J. M. & Simberloff, D. Extinction by hybridization and introgression. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 27, 83–109 (1996).
Beatty, G. E., Philipp, M. & Provan, J. Unidirectional hybridization at a species’ range boundary: Implications for habitat tracking. Divers. Distrib. 16, 1–9 (2010).
Mallet, J., Wynne, I. R. & Thomas, C. D. Hybridisation and climate change: Brown argus butterflies in Britain (Polyommatus subgenus Aricia). Insect Conserv. Divers. 4, 192–199 (2011).
Fitzpatrick, M. C. & Hargrove, W. W. The projection of species distribution models and the problem of non-analog climate. Biodivers. Conserv. 18, 2255–2261 (2009).
Araújo, M. B. & Luoto, M. The importance of biotic interactions for modelling species distributions under climate change. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 16, 743–753 (2007).
Hellman, J. J., Prior, K. M. & Pelini, S. L. The influence of species interactions on geographic range change under climate change. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 1249, 18–28 (2012).
Vallin, N., Rice, A. M., Arntsen, H., Kulma, K. & Qvarnström, A. Combined effects of interspecific competition and hybridization impede local coexistence of Ficedula flycatchers. Evol. Ecol. 26, 927–942 (2012).
Burns, J. H. & Strauss, S. Y. More closely related species are more ecologically similar in an experimental test. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 5302–5307 (2011).
Barton, N. H. & Hewitt, G. M. Analysis of hybrid zones. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 16, 113–148 (1985).
Becker, M. et al. Hybridization may facilitate in situ survival of endemic species through periods of climate change. Nature Clim. Change 3, 1039–1043 (2013).
Theobald, D. M., Reed, S. E., Fields, K. & Soule, M. Connecting natural landscapes using a landscape permeability model to prioritize conservation activities in the United States. Conserv. Lett. 5, 123–133 (2012).
Heller, N. E. & Zavaleta, E. S. Biodiversity management in the face of climate change: A review of 22 years of recommendations. Biol. Conserv. 142, 14–32 (2009).
Hilty, J. A., Lidicker, W. Z. Jr & Merenlender, A. Corridor Ecology: The Science and Practice of Linking Landscapes for Biodiversity Conservation (Island Press, 2006).
Thomas, C. D. et al. Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427, 145–148 (2004).
Anacker, B. L. & Strauss, S. Y. The geography and ecology of plant speciation: Range overlap and niche divergence in sister species. Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20132980 (2014).
Lawler, J. J. et al. Projected climate-induced faunal change in the Western Hemisphere. Ecology 90, 588–597 (2009).
Breiman, L. Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45, 5–32 (2001).
R Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2009); http://www.R-project.org
Lawler, J. J., White, D., Neilson, R. P. & Blaustein, A. R. Predicting climate-induced range shifts: Model differences and model reliability. Glob. Change Biol. 12, 1568–1584 (2006).
Ridgely, R. S. et al. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere (NatureServe, 2003).
Patterson, B. D. et al. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere (NatureServe, 2007).
New, M., Hulme, M. & Jones, P. Representing twentieth-century space-time climate variability. Part I: Development of a 1961–90 mean monthly terrestrial climatology. J. Clim. 12, 829–856 (1999).
New, M. et al. A high-resolution data set of surface climate over global land areas. Clim. Res. 21, 1–25 (2002).
Mitchell, T. D. & Jones, P. D. An improved method of constructing a database of monthly climate observations and associated high-resolution grids. Int. J. Climatol. 25, 693–712 (2005).
Nakicenovic, N. et al. Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000).
Kenward, M. G. & Roger, J. H. Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics 53, 983–997 (1997).
Acknowledgements
This work was completed with financial support from the Wilburforce Foundation, the Doris Duke Foundation, and the Packard Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
M.K. conceived the study. M.K., C.B.W., J.M.D., J.L.M., J.A.H., T.M.N., J.J.T. and J.J.L. designed the analysis. C.B.W. and J.M.D. conducted most of the data analysis, with additional analysis completed by J.L.M., T.M.N., J.A.H. and M.K. M.K., J.J.L., J.J.T., C.B.W. and J.M.D. wrote the paper.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Krosby, M., Wilsey, C., McGuire, J. et al. Climate-induced range overlap among closely related species. Nature Clim Change 5, 883–886 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2699
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2699
This article is cited by
-
Climate change will redefine taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity of Odonata in space and time
npj Biodiversity (2022)
-
Agonistic behavioural asymmetry in two species of montane lizard that exhibit elevational replacement
Landscape Ecology (2021)
-
Detecting no natural hybridization and predicting range overlap in Saccharina angustata and Saccharina japonica
Journal of Applied Phycology (2021)
-
Habitat suitability for the invasion of Bombus terrestris in East Asian countries: A case study of spatial overlap with local Chinese bumblebees
Scientific Reports (2018)
-
Long-distance migratory birds threatened by multiple independent risks from global change
Nature Climate Change (2018)