Open AccessCrop wild relatives range shifts and conservation in Europe under climate change
Author(s) -
AguirreGutiérrez Jesús,
Treuren Rob,
Hoekstra Roel,
Hintum Theo J.L.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
diversity and distributions
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.918
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1472-4642
pISSN - 1366-9516
DOI - 10.1111/ddi.12573
Subject(s) - biological dispersal , threatened species , climate change , range (aeronautics) , species distribution , habitat , environmental niche modelling , ecology , geography , distribution (mathematics) , biology , population , ecological niche , mathematical analysis , materials science , demography , mathematics , sociology , composite material
Aim Climate change is expected to have a great impact on the distribution of wild flora around the world. Wild plant species are an important component of the genetic resources for crop improvement, which is especially important in face of climate change impacts. Still, many crop wild relatives ( CWR s) are currently threatened in their natural habitat and are poorly represented in gene bank collections. To guide in situ conservation measures and to prioritize species for ex situ conservation, predictions are needed about future species distributions as a result of climate change. Location Europe. Methods Using species occurrence data and present and future climatic information, we investigated the possible impacts of future climate change on the European distribution of a selection of CWR s red‐listed in the Netherlands using a species distribution modelling framework. The representation of the CWR s in European protected areas was investigated for the current and future climatic conditions. The models were created based on an optimistic ( RCP 2.6) and pessimistic ( RCP 8.5) climate change scenario. Results A shift in distribution range, mostly towards northern locations, was observed for all investigated species. A loss of distribution area of up to 61.10% (full dispersal assumption) and 68.91% (no dispersal) according to RCP 2.6 was observed for some species. A distribution area loss of up to 90.92% (full dispersal) and 98.36% (no dispersal) was predicted for the most affected species under the RCP 8.5. Based on the predicted distribution in protected areas, present occupation in nature reserves appeared to be no guarantee for the species’ future protection and persistence. Main conclusions We conclude that in situ conservation measures, ignoring the effects of climate change, will not be effective for many CWR s and that large‐scale ex situ conservation actions are needed to safeguard CWR s.