The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reducing uncertainty in projections of extinction risk from climate change
Abstract
Aim Concern over the implications of climate change for biodiversity has led to the use of species–climate ‘envelope’ models to forecast risks of species extinctions under climate change scenarios. Recent studies have demonstrated significant variability in model projections and there remains a need to test the accuracy of models and to reduce uncertainties. Testing of models has been limited by a lack of data against which projections of future ranges can be tested. Here we provide a first test of the predictive accuracy of such models using observed species’ range shifts and climate change in two periods of the recent past. Location Britain. Methods Observed range shifts for 116 breeding bird species in Britain between 1967 and 1972 ( t 1 ) and 1987–91 ( t 2 ) are used. We project range shifts between t 1 and t 2 for each species based on observed climate using 16 alternative models (4 methods × 2 data parameterizations × 2 rules to transform probabilities of occurrence into presence and absence records). Results Modelling results were extremely variable, with projected range shifts varying both in magnitude and in direction from observed changes and from each other. However, using approaches that explore the central tendency (consensus) of model projections, we were able to improve agreement between projected and observed shifts significantly. Conclusions Our results provide the first empirical evidence of the value of species–climate ‘envelope’ models under climate change and demonstrate reduction in uncertainty and improvement in accuracy through selection of the most consensual projections.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Extinction risk from climate change
Thomas, C. D., Cameron, A., Green, R. E., Bakkenes, M., Beaumont, L. J., Collingham, Y. C., Erasmus, B. F. N., de Siqueira, M. F., Grainger, A., Hannah, L., et al. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02121 · Cited by 7,695
A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models
FIELDING, A. H., & BELL, J. F. (1997) · Environmental Conservation · doi:10.1017/s0376892997000088 · Cited by 6,956
Pattern Recognition and Neural Networks
Ripley, B. D. (1996) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511812651 · Cited by 6,459
Pearson, R. G., & Dawson, T. P. (2003) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1046/j.1466-822x.2003.00042.x · Cited by 4,252
Verification, Validation, and Confirmation of Numerical Models in the Earth Sciences
Oreskes, N., Shrader-Frechette, K., & Belitz, K. (1994) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.263.5147.641 · Cited by 3,010
Combining forecasts: A review and annotated bibliography
Clemen, R. T. (1989) · International Journal of Forecasting · doi:10.1016/0169-2070(89)90012-5 · Cited by 2,164
New, M., Hulme, M., & Jones, P. (2000) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2000)013<2217:rtcstc>2.0.co;2 · Cited by 2,097
Validation of species–climate impact models under climate change
Araújo, M. B., Pearson, R. G., Thuiller, W., & Erhard, M. (2005) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.01000.x · Cited by 1,669
Self-citationCombining forecasts: A review and annotated bibliography
(1990) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/0024-6301(90)90316-v · Cited by 1,465
The GARP modelling system: problems and solutions to automated spatial prediction
STOCKWELL, D. (1999) · International Journal of Geographical Information Science · doi:10.1080/136588199241391 · Cited by 1,395
Cited by
Ensemble forecasting of species distributions
ARAUJO, M., & NEW, M. (2007) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2006.09.010 · Cited by 3,640
BIOMOD – a platform for ensemble forecasting of species distributions
Thuiller, W., Lafourcade, B., Engler, R., & Araújo, M. B. (2009) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2008.05742.x · Cited by 2,749
Self-citationErosion of Lizard Diversity by Climate Change and Altered Thermal Niches
Sinervo, B., Méndez-de-la-Cruz, F., Miles, D. B., Heulin, B., Bastiaans, E., Villagrán-Santa Cruz, M., Lara-Resendiz, R., Martínez-Méndez, N., Calderón-Espinosa, M. L., Meza-Lázaro, R. N., et al. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1184695 · Cited by 1,902
Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling
Araújo, M. B., & Guisan, A. (2006) · Journal of Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01584.x · Cited by 1,901
Self-citationMaking better M axent models of species distributions: complexity, overfitting and evaluation
Radosavljevic, A., & Anderson, R. P. (2014) · Journal of Biogeography · doi:10.1111/jbi.12227 · Cited by 1,723
Metadata
- Authors
- Araújo, M. B., Whittaker, R. J., Ladle, R. J., & Erhard, M.
- Venue
- Global Ecology and Biogeography
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-07-19
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 529-538
- ISSN
- 1466-822X (ISSN-L)
- 1466-8238
- OpenAlex
- W2125118617
- Cited by
- 553
- References
- 44
- FWCI
- 18.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Reducing uncertainty in projections of extinction risk from climate change. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1466-822x.2005.00182.x
- The paper
- Araújo, M. B., Whittaker, R. J., Ladle, R. J., & Erhard, M. (2005). Reducing uncertainty in projections of extinction risk from climate change. Global Ecology and Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-822x.2005.00182.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.