Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 336

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Vulnerability of African mammals to anthropogenic climate change under conservative land transformation assumptions

Open access
THUILLER, WILFRIED, BROENNIMANN, OLIVIER, HUGHES, GREG, ALKEMADE, J. ROBERT M., MIDGLEY, GUY. F., CORSI, FABIO·2006·Global Change Biology

Abstract

Recent observations show that human‐induced climate change (CC) and land transformation (LT) are threatening wildlife globally. Thus, there is a need to assess the sensitivity of wildlife on large spatial scales and evaluate whether national parks (NPs), a key conservation tools used to protect species, will meet their mandate under future CC and LT conditions. Here, we assess the sensitivity of 277 mammals at African scale to CC at 10′ resolution, using static LT assumptions in a ‘first‐cut’ estimate, in the absence of credible future LT trends. We examine the relationship between species' current distribution and macroclimatic variables using generalized additive models, and include LT indirectly as a filter. Future projections are derived using two CC scenarios (for 2050 and 2080) to estimate the spatial patterns of loss and gain in species richness that might ultimately result. We then apply the IUCN Red List criteria A3(c) of potential range loss to evaluate species sensitivity. We finally estimate the sensitivity of 141 NPs in terms of both species richness and turnover. Assuming no spread of species, 10–15% of the species are projected to fall within the critically endangered or extinct categories by 2050 and between 25% and 40% by 2080. Assuming unlimited species spread, less extreme results show proportions dropping to approximately 10–20% by 2080. Spatial patterns of richness loss and gain show contrasting latitudinal patterns with a westward range shift of species around the species‐rich equatorial zone in central Africa, and an eastward shift in southern Africa, mainly because of latitudinal aridity gradients across these ecological transition zones. Xeric shrubland NPs may face significant richness losses not compensated by species influxes. Other NPs might expect substantial losses and influxes of species. On balance, the NPs might ultimately realize a substantial shift in the mammalian species composition of a magnitude unprecedented in recent geological time. To conclude, the effects of global CC and LT on wildlife communities may be most noticeable not as a loss of species from their current ranges, but instead as a fundamental change in community composition.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01115.x

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 336

Metadata

Authors
THUILLER, W., BROENNIMANN, O., HUGHES, G., ALKEMADE, J. R. M., MIDGLEY, G. F., & CORSI, F.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-03
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
424-440
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2118776848
Cited by
336
References
8
FWCI
12.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Vulnerability of African mammals to anthropogenic climate change under conservative land transformation assumptions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01115.x
The paper
THUILLER, W., BROENNIMANN, O., HUGHES, G., ALKEMADE, J. R. M., MIDGLEY, G. F., & CORSI, F. (2006). Vulnerability of African mammals to anthropogenic climate change under conservative land transformation assumptions. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01115.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.