Variable intraspecific response to climate change in a medicinally important African tree species, <i>Vachellia sieberiana</i> (<scp>DC</scp>.) (paperbark thorn)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Climate change is predicted to disproportionately impact sub‐Saharan Africa, with potential devastating consequences on plant populations. Climate change may, however, impact intraspecific taxa differently. The aim of the study was to determine the current distribution and impact of climate change on three varieties of Vachellia sieberiana , that is, var. sieberiana , var. villosa and var. woodii . Ensemble species distribution models (SDMs) were built in “biomod2” using 66, 45, and 137 occurrence records for var. sieberiana , var. villosa , and var. woodii , respectively. The ensemble SDMs were projected to 2041–2060 and 2081–2100 under three general circulation models (GCMs) and two shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs). The three GCMs were the Canadian Earth System Model version 5, the Institut Pierre‐Simon Laplace Climate Model version 6A Low Resolution, and the Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate version 6. The suitable habitat of var. sieberiana predominantly occurs in the Sudanian and Zambezian phytochoria while that of var. villosa largely occurs in the Sudanian phytochorion. The suitable habitat of var. woodii mainly occurs in the Zambezian phyotochorion. There is coexistence of var. villosa and var. sieberiana in the Sudanian phytochorion while var. sieberiana and var. woodii coexist in the Zambezian phytochorion. Under SSP2‐4.5 in 2041–2060 and averaged across the three GCMs, the suitable habitat expanded by 33.8% and 119.7% for var. sieberiana and var. villosa , respectively. In contrast, the suitable habitat of var. woodii contracted by −8.4%. Similar trends were observed in 2041–2060 under SSP5‐8.5 [var. sieberiana (38.6%), var. villosa (139.0%), and var. woodii (−10.4%)], in 2081–2100 under SSP2‐4.5 [var. sieberiana (4.6%), var. villosa (153.4%), and var. woodii (−14.4%)], and in 2081–2100 under SSP5‐8.5 [var. sieberiana (49.3%), var. villosa (233.4%), and var. woodii (−30.7%)]. Different responses to climate change call for unique management and conservation decisions for the varieties.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".