Montane species track rising temperatures better in the tropics than in the temperate zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many species are responding to global warming by shifting their distributions upslope to higher elevations, but the observed rates of shifts vary considerably among studies. Here, we test the hypothesis that this variation is in part explained by latitude, with tropical species being particularly responsive to warming temperatures. We analyze two independent empirical datasets-shifts in species' elevational ranges, and changes in composition of forest inventory tree plots. Tropical species are tracking rising temperatures 2.1-2.4 times (range shift dataset) and 10 times (tree plot dataset) better than their temperate counterparts. Models predict that for a 100 m upslope shift in temperature isotherm, species at the equator have shifted their elevational ranges 93-96 m upslope, while species at 45° latitude have shifted only 37-42 m upslope. For tree plots, models predict that a 1°C increase in temperature leads to an increase in community temperature index (CTI), a metric of the average temperature optima of tree species within a plot, of 0.56°C at the equator but no change in CTI at 45° latitude (-0.033°C). This latitudinal gradient in temperature tracking suggests that tropical montane communities may be on an "escalator to extinction" as global temperatures continue to rise.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".