Geology topics

David N. Bucklin

Publications and source records attributed to David N. Bucklin.

13 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2020

Preserving connectivity under climate and land-use change: No one-size-fits-all approach for focal species in similar habitats

Habitat connectivity is essential for maintaining populations of wildlife species, especially as climate changes. Knowledge about the fate of existing habitat networks in a changing climate and in light of land-use change is critical for determining which types of conservation actions must be taken to maintain those networks. However, information is lacking about how multiple focal species that use similar habitats overlap in the degree and geographic patterns of threats to linkages among currently suitable habitat patches. We sought to address that gap. We assessed climate change threat to existing linkages in the southeastern United States for three wildlife species that use similar habitats but differ in the degree to which their ranges are limited by climate, habitat specificity, and dispersal ability. Linkages for the specialist species (timber rattlesnake), whose range is climate-restricted, were more likely to serve as climate change refugia – that is, they were more likely to be climate-stable – by the middle of the 21st century. This contrasts with the two more generalist species (Rafinesque's big-eared bat and American black bear), whose linkages were threatened by climate change and thus required adaptation measures. Further incorporation of projected land-use change and current protection status for important linkages narrows down our recommended conservation actions for each species. Our results highlight the surprising ways in which even species that use similar habitats will experience differences in the degree and geographic patterns of threats to connectivity. Taking action before these projected changes occur will be critical for successful conservation.

Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, M↗

USGS2020

Predicting multi-species foraging hotspots for marine turtles in the Gulf of Mexico

Quantifying the distribution of animals and identifying underlying characteristics that define suitable habitat are essential for effective conservation of free-ranging species. Prioritizing areas for conservation is important in managing a geographic extent that has a high level of disturbance and limited conservation resources. We examined the potential use of a species distribution model ensemble for multi-species conservation in marine habitats. Using satellite telemetry locations during foraging as input data, and ensemble ecological niche models, we predicted foraging areas for 2 nesting marine turtle species within the Gulf of Mexico (GoM): Kemp’s ridley Lepidochelys kempii (n = 63) and loggerhead Caretta caretta (n = 63). We considered 7 geophysical, biological, and climatic variables and compared contributing factors for each species’ foraging habitat selection. For both species, predicted suitable foraging habitats encompassed large areas along the GoM coast, but only intersected with each other in relatively small areas. Highly parameterized models resulted in overall greater fits, suggesting that multiple factors influence habitat selection by these species. Model validation results were mixed: cross-validation resulted in high prediction accuracy for both species, but an evaluation against independent data resulted in a low omission rate (5%) for Kemp’s ridleys and a high omission rate (72%) for loggerheads. The relatively small intersection of model-predicted foraging areas for these 2 species within the study area may indicate possible niche differentiations. The high omission rate for loggerheads indicates our samples likely underrepresent the population and illustrates the challenges in predicting suitable foraging extents for species that make dynamic movements and have greater individual variability.

Gulf of Mexico↗

USGS2018

Sympatry or syntopy? Investigating drivers of distribution and co‐occurrence for two imperiled sea turtle species in Gulf of Mexico neritic waters

Animals co‐occurring in a region (sympatry) may use the same habitat (syntopy) within that region. A central aim in ecology is determining what factors drive species distributions (i.e., abiotic conditions, dispersal limitations, and/or biotic interactions). Assessing the degree of biotic interactions can be difficult for species with wide ranges at sea. This study investigated the spatial ecology of two sea turtle species that forage on benthic invertebrates in neritic GoM waters: Kemp's ridleys ( Lepidochelys kempii ) and loggerheads ( Caretta caretta ). We used satellite tracking and modeled behavioral modes, then calculated individual home ranges, compared foraging areas, and determined extent of co‐occurrence. Using six environmental variables and principal component analysis, we assessed similarity of chosen foraging sites. We predicted foraging location (eco‐region) based on species, nesting site, and turtle size. For 127 turtles (64 Kemp's ridleys, 63 loggerheads) tracked from 1989 to 2013, foraging home ranges were nine to ten times larger for Kemp's ridleys than for loggerheads. Species intersected off all U.S. coasts and the Yucatán Peninsula, but co‐occurrence areas were small compared to species' distributions. Kemp's ridley foraging home ranges were concentrated in the northern GoM, whereas those for loggerheads were concentrated in the eastern GoM. The two species were different in all habitat variables compared (latitude, longitude, distance to shore, net primary production, mean sea surface temperature, and bathymetry). Nesting site was the single dominant variable that dictated foraging ecoregion. Although Kemp's ridleys and loggerheads may compete for resources, the separation in foraging areas, significant differences in environmental conditions, and importance of nesting location on ecoregion selection (i.e., dispersal ability) indicate that adult females of these species do not interact greatly during foraging and that dispersal and environmental factors more strongly determine their distributions. These species show sympatry in this region but evidence for syntopy was rare.

Ecology and Evolution↗

USGS2018

Landscape drivers and social dynamics shaping microbial contamination risk in three Maya communities in southern Belize, Central America

Land transformation can have cascading effects on hydrology, water quality, and human users of water resources, with serious implications for human health. An interdisciplinary analysis is presented, whereby remote-sensing data of changing land use and cover are related to surface hydrology and microbial contamination in domestic use areas of three indigenous Maya communities in Belize, Central America. We asked whether a departure from traditional land-use patterns toward intensified use led to consequences for hydrology and microbial contamination of drinking water, and investigated how social factors in the three study communities may act to ameliorate human health risks associated with water contamination. We showed that a departure from traditional land use to more intensive cultivation and grazing led to significantly increased surface water runoff, and intensified microbial contamination of surface water sources sometimes used for drinking. Results further suggested that groundwater contamination was widespread regardless of land cover, due to the widespread presence of pit latrines, pigs, and cows on the landscape, and that human users were consistently subject to health risks from potential pathogens as a result. Given that both surface and groundwater resources were found to be contaminated, it is important that water distribution systems (piped water from tanks; shallow and deep wells) be monitored for Escherichia coli and treated when necessary to reduce or eliminate contaminants and protect public health. Results of interviews suggested that strengthened capacity within the communities to monitor and treat centralized drinking water sources and increase water treatment at the point of use could lead to reduced risk to water consumers.

Water↗

USGS2018

Marine threats overlap key foraging habitat for two imperiled sea turtle species in the Gulf of Mexico

Effective management of human activities affecting listed species requires understanding both threats and animal habitat-use patterns. However, the extent of spatial overlap between high-use foraging areas (where multiple marine species congregate) and anthropogenic threats is not well known. Our modeling approach incorporates data on sea turtle spatial ecology and a suite of threats in the Gulf of Mexico to identify and map “hot spots” of threats to two imperiled turtle species. Of all 820 “high” threats grid cells, our tracked turtles foraged at least one day in 77% of them. Although threat data were not available outside the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, our map of turtle and threat “hotspots” can be incorporated in future more comprehensive threat analyses for the region. Knowledge of these shared foraging- and threat-areas can assist managers charged with designing effective conservation and population recovery strategies, in future habitat modeling efforts, and in designations of Gulf of Mexico habitat with high conservation value.

Frontiers in Marine Science↗

USGS2017

Inter-nesting movements and habitat-use of adult female Kemp’s ridley turtles in the Gulf of Mexico

Species vulnerability is increased when individuals congregate in restricted areas for breeding; yet, breeding habitats are not well defined for many marine species. Identification and quantification of these breeding habitats are essential to effective conservation. Satellite telemetry and switching state-space modeling (SSM) were used to define inter-nesting habitat of endangered Kemp’s ridley turtles ( Lepidochelys kempii ) in the Gulf of Mexico. Turtles were outfitted with satellite transmitters after nesting at Padre Island National Seashore, Texas, USA, from 1998 through 2013 (n = 60); Rancho Nuevo, Tamaulipas, Mexico, during 2010 and 2011 (n = 11); and Tecolutla, Veracruz, Mexico, during 2012 and 2013 (n = 11). These sites span the range of nearly all nesting by this species. Inter-nesting habitat lies in a narrow band of nearshore western Gulf of Mexico waters in the USA and Mexico, with mean water depth of 14 to 19 m within a mean distance to shore of 6 to 11 km as estimated by 50% kernel density estimate, α-Hull, and minimum convex polygon methodologies. Turtles tracked during the inter-nesting period moved, on average, 17.5 km/day and a mean total distance of 398 km. Mean home ranges occupied were 725 to 2948 km 2 . Our results indicate that these nearshore western Gulf waters represent critical inter-nesting habitat for this species, where threats such as shrimp trawling and oil and gas platforms also occur. Up to half of all adult female Kemp’s ridleys occupy this habitat for weeks to months during each nesting season. Because inter-nesting habitat for this species is concentrated in nearshore waters of the western Gulf of Mexico in both Mexico and the USA, international collaboration is needed to protect this essential habitat and the turtles occurring within it.

Gulf of Mexico↗

USGS2017

Comparison of climate envelope models developed using expert-selected variables versus statistical selection

Climate envelope models are widely used to describe potential future distribution of species under different climate change scenarios. It is broadly recognized that there are both strengths and limitations to using climate envelope models and that outcomes are sensitive to initial assumptions, inputs, and modeling methods Selection of predictor variables, a central step in modeling, is one of the areas where different techniques can yield varying results. Selection of climate variables to use as predictors is often done using statistical approaches that develop correlations between occurrences and climate data. These approaches have received criticism in that they rely on the statistical properties of the data rather than directly incorporating biological information about species responses to temperature and precipitation. We evaluated and compared models and prediction maps for 15 threatened or endangered species in Florida based on two variable selection techniques: expert opinion and a statistical method. We compared model performance between these two approaches for contemporary predictions, and the spatial correlation, spatial overlap and area predicted for contemporary and future climate predictions. In general, experts identified more variables as being important than the statistical method and there was low overlap in the variable sets (<40%) between the two methods Despite these differences in variable sets (expert versus statistical), models had high performance metrics (>0.9 for area under the curve (AUC) and >0.7 for true skill statistic (TSS). Spatial overlap, which compares the spatial configuration between maps constructed using the different variable selection techniques, was only moderate overall (about 60%), with a great deal of variability across species. Difference in spatial overlap was even greater under future climate projections, indicating additional divergence of model outputs from different variable selection techniques. Our work is in agreement with other studies which have found that for broad-scale species distribution modeling, using statistical methods of variable selection is a useful first step, especially when there is a need to model a large number of species or expert knowledge of the species is limited. Expert input can then be used to refine models that seem unrealistic or for species that experts believe are particularly sensitive to change. It also emphasizes the importance of using multiple models to reduce uncertainty and improve map outputs for conservation planning. Where outputs overlap or show the same direction of change there is greater certainty in the predictions. Areas of disagreement can be used for learning by asking why the models do not agree, and may highlight areas where additional on-the-ground data collection could improve the models.

Ecological Modelling↗

USGS2016

Considerations for building climate-based species distribution models

Climate plays an important role in the distribution of species. A given species may adjust to new conditions in-place, move to new areas with suitable climates, or go extinct. Scientists and conservation practitioners use mathematical models to predict the effects of future climate change on wildlife and plan for a biodiverse future. This 8-page fact sheet written by David N. Bucklin, Mathieu Basille, Stephanie S. Romañach, Laura A. Brandt, Frank J. Mazzotti, and James I. Watling and published by the Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation explains how, with a better understanding of species distribution models, we can predict how species may respond to climate change. The models alone cannot tell us how a certain species will actually respond to changes in climate, but they can inform conservation planning that aims to allow species to both adapt in place and (for those that are able to) move to newly suitable areas. Such planning will likely minimize loss of biodiversity due to climate change.

Report↗

USGS2015

Performance metrics and variance partitioning reveal sources of uncertainty in species distribution models

Species distribution models (SDMs) are widely used in basic and applied ecology, making it important to understand sources and magnitudes of uncertainty in SDM performance and predictions. We analyzed SDM performance and partitioned variance among prediction maps for 15 rare vertebrate species in the southeastern USA using all possible combinations of seven potential sources of uncertainty in SDMs: algorithms, climate datasets, model domain, species presences, variable collinearity, CO 2 emissions scenarios, and general circulation models. The choice of modeling algorithm was the greatest source of uncertainty in SDM performance and prediction maps, with some additional variation in performance associated with the comprehensiveness of the species presences used for modeling. Other sources of uncertainty that have received attention in the SDM literature such as variable collinearity and model domain contributed little to differences in SDM performance or predictions in this study. Predictions from different algorithms tended to be more variable at northern range margins for species with more northern distributions, which may complicate conservation planning at the leading edge of species' geographic ranges. The clear message emerging from this work is that researchers should use multiple algorithms for modeling rather than relying on predictions from a single algorithm, invest resources in compiling a comprehensive set of species presences, and explicitly evaluate uncertainty in SDM predictions at leading range margins.

Ecological Modelling↗

USGS2014

Comparing species distribution models constructed with different subsets of environmental predictors

Aim To assess the usefulness of combining climate predictors with additional types of environmental predictors in species distribution models for range-restricted species, using common correlative species distribution modelling approaches. Location Florida, USA Methods We used five different algorithms to create distribution models for 14 vertebrate species, using seven different predictor sets: two with bioclimate predictors only, and five ‘combination’ models using bioclimate predictors plus ‘additional’ predictors from groups representing: human influence, land cover, extreme weather or noise (spatially random data).We use a linear mixed-model approach to analyse the effects of predictor set and algorithm on model accuracy, variable importance scores and spatial predictions. Results Regardless of modelling algorithm, no one predictor set produced significantly more accurate models than all others, though models including human influence predictors were the only ones with significantly higher accuracy than climate-only models. Climate predictors had consistently higher variable importance scores than additional predictors in combination models, though there was variation related to predictor type and algorithm. While spatial predictions varied moderately between predictor sets, discrepancies were significantly greater between modelling algorithms than between predictor sets. Furthermore, there were no differences in the level of agreement between binary ‘presence–absence’ maps and independent species range maps related to the predictor set used. Main conclusions Our results indicate that additional predictors have relatively minor effects on the accuracy of climate-based species distribution models and minor to moderate effects on spatial predictions. We suggest that implementing species distribution models with only climate predictors may provide an effective and efficient approach for initial assessments of environmental suitability.

Florida↗

USGS2014

Assessing effects of variation in global climate data sets on spatial predictions from climate envelope models

Climate change poses new challenges for natural resource managers. Predictive modeling of species–environment relationships using climate envelope models can enhance our understanding of climate change effects on biodiversity, assist in assessment of invasion risk by exotic organisms, and inform life-history understanding of individual species. While increasing interest has focused on the role of uncertainty in future conditions on model predictions, models also may be sensitive to the initial conditions on which they are trained. Although climate envelope models are usually trained using data on contemporary climate, we lack systematic comparisons of model performance and predictions across alternative climate data sets available for model training. Here, we seek to fill that gap by comparing variability in predictions between two contemporary climate data sets to variability in spatial predictions among three alternative projections of future climate. Overall, correlations between monthly temperature and precipitation variables were very high for both contemporary and future data. Model performance varied across algorithms, but not between two alternative contemporary climate data sets. Spatial predictions varied more among alternative general-circulation models describing future climate conditions than between contemporary climate data sets. However, we did find that climate envelope models with low Cohen's kappa scores made more discrepant spatial predictions between climate data sets for the contemporary period than did models with high Cohen's kappa scores. We suggest conservation planners evaluate multiple performance metrics and be aware of the importance of differences in initial conditions for spatial predictions from climate envelope models.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management↗

USGS2012

Climate downscaling effects on predictive ecological models: a case study for threatened and endangered vertebrates in the southeastern United States

High-resolution (downscaled) projections of future climate conditions are critical inputs to a wide variety of ecological and socioeconomic models and are created using numerous different approaches. Here, we conduct a sensitivity analysis of spatial predictions from climate envelope models for threatened and endangered vertebrates in the southeastern United States to determine whether two different downscaling approaches (with and without the use of a regional climate model) affect climate envelope model predictions when all other sources of variation are held constant. We found that prediction maps differed spatially between downscaling approaches and that the variation attributable to downscaling technique was comparable to variation between maps generated using different general circulation models (GCMs). Precipitation variables tended to show greater discrepancies between downscaling techniques than temperature variables, and for one GCM, there was evidence that more poorly resolved precipitation variables contributed relatively more to model uncertainty than more well-resolved variables. Our work suggests that ecological modelers requiring high-resolution climate projections should carefully consider the type of downscaling applied to the climate projections prior to their use in predictive ecological modeling. The uncertainty associated with alternative downscaling methods may rival that of other, more widely appreciated sources of variation, such as the general circulation model or emissions scenario with which future climate projections are created.

Alabama;Florida;Georgia;Mississippi;South Carolina↗

USGS2012

Do bioclimate variables improve performance of climate envelope models?

Climate envelope models are widely used to forecast potential effects of climate change on species distributions. A key issue in climate envelope modeling is the selection of predictor variables that most directly influence species. To determine whether model performance and spatial predictions were related to the selection of predictor variables, we compared models using bioclimate variables with models constructed from monthly climate data for twelve terrestrial vertebrate species in the southeastern USA using two different algorithms (random forests or generalized linear models), and two model selection techniques (using uncorrelated predictors or a subset of user-defined biologically relevant predictor variables). There were no differences in performance between models created with bioclimate or monthly variables, but one metric of model performance was significantly greater using the random forest algorithm compared with generalized linear models. Spatial predictions between maps using bioclimate and monthly variables were very consistent using the random forest algorithm with uncorrelated predictors, whereas we observed greater variability in predictions using generalized linear models.

Ecological Modelling↗