Climate Futures for Lizards and Snakes in Western North America May Result in New Species Management Issues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We assessed changes in fundamental climate‐niche space for lizard and snake species in western North America under modeled climate scenarios to inform natural resource managers of possible shifts in species distributions. We generated eight distribution models for each of 130 snake and lizard species in western North America under six time‐by‐climate scenarios. We combined the highest‐performing models per species into a single ensemble model for each scenario. Maps were generated from the ensemble models to depict climate‐niche space for each species and scenario. Patterns of species richness based on climate suitability and niche shifts were calculated from the projections at the scale of the entire study area and individual states and provinces, from Canada to Mexico. Squamate species' climate‐niche space for the recent‐time climate scenario and published known ranges were highly correlated (r = 0.81). Overall, reptile climate‐niche space was projected to move northward in the future. Sixty‐eight percent of species were projected to expand their current climate‐niche space rather than to shift, contract, or remain stable. Only 8.5% of species were projected to lose climate‐niche space in the future, and these species primarily occurred in Mexico and the southwestern U.S. We found few species were projected to lose all suitable climate‐niche space at the state or province level, although species were often predicted to occupy novel areas, such as at higher elevations. Most squamate species were projected to increase their climate‐niche space in future climate scenarios. As climate niches move northward, species are predicted to cross administrative borders, resulting in novel conservation issues for local landowners and natural resource agencies. However, information on species dispersal abilities, landscape connectivity, biophysical tolerances, and habitat suitability is needed to contextualize predictions relative to realized future niche expansions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".