Biotic and abiotic variables show little redundancy in explaining tree species distributions

• Published in: Ecography (Copenhagen) Vol. 33; no. 6; pp. 1038 - 1048
• Main Authors: Meier, Eliane S., Kienast, Felix, Pearman, Peter B., Svenning, Jens-Christian, Thuiller, Wilfried, Araújo, Miguel B., Guisan, Antoine, Zimmermann, Niklaus E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.12.2010; Blackwell Publishing
• Subjects: Climate change; Ecological competition; Ecological modeling; Forest ecology; Modeling; Plants; Seed dispersal; Shade tolerance; Special issue: Species Distribution Modelling; Species; Statistical variance
• ISSN: 0906-7590; 1600-0587
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06229.x

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.