Geology Reports⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70203530

Knowing your limits: Estimating range boundaries and co-occurrence zones for two competing plethodontid salamanders

S. M. Amburgey·D. A. W. Miller·Adrianne B. Brand·Andrea M. Dietrich·Evan H. Campbell Grant
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Understanding threats to species persistence requires knowledge of where species currently occur. We explore methods for estimating two important facets of species distributions, namely where the range limit occurs and how species interactions structure distributions. Accurate understanding of range limits is crucial for predicting range dynamics and shifts in response to interspecific interactions and climate change. Additionally, species interactions are increasingly recognized as an important but not well‐understood predictor of range shifts. Our objective was to predict range limits and contact zones for two plethodontid salamanders, the highly range‐restricted Shenandoah salamander ( Plethodon shenandoah ) and the wide‐ranging red‐backed salamander ( Plethodon cinereus ). Using detection/non‐detection data, we assess four methodological decisions when estimating species’ distributions: (1) accounting for imperfect detection, (2) covariates to predict species occurrences, (3) accounting for species interactions, and (4) the inclusion of spatial autocorrelation. We found that Shenandoah salamander and red‐backed salamander co‐occurrence would have been underestimated and the range edge misidentified had we not accounted for incomplete detection. Covariates related to habitat were not sufficient to explain species’ range boundaries. Models that included spatial autocorrelation (i.e., a conditional autoregressive random effect) performed better than models that included just species interactions (i.e., detection and occurrence were conditional on the other species being present) and models that included both spatial autocorrelation and species interactions. Further, we found that the breadth of primary contact zones was typically 60–170 m, which is greater on average than previous estimates. In addition, we frequently observed secondary, disjunct contact zones along the range boundary. Understanding the extent to which species co‐occur and how the range boundaries are shaped is crucial to conservation efforts. Our work indicates that accounting for detection is crucial for accurately characterizing range edges and that spatial models may be especially effective in modeling distributions at the boundary.

Explore related subjects

EcosphereArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S. M. Amburgey, D. A. W. Miller, Adrianne B. Brand, Andrea M. Dietrich, Evan H. Campbell Grant. 2019-05-09. Knowing your limits: Estimating range boundaries and co-occurrence zones for two competing plethodontid salamanders. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2727

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Evaluating harvest liberalization strategies on population dynamics of southern latitude temperate-breeding Canada geese

The recovery of the Canada goose ( Branta canadensis ) is one of North America's greatest conservation success stories. Today, continental abundance of temperate-breeding Canada geese (those breeding in southern Canada and lower 48 states in the United States) greatly exceeds historical levels. As a result of increased abundance, human–goose conflicts have also increased, ranging from private and agricultural property damage to human health concerns. Managers have primarily attempted to lower Canada goose populations using hunter harvest via liberalized hunting regulations (increased bag limits and total hunting days). To evaluate the effectiveness of harvest strategies for temperate-breeding Canada geese, managers need a better understanding of how liberalized hunting regulations affect population dynamics. We estimated survival and harvest probabilities, abundance, and recovery distribution of temperate-breeding Canada geese banded in Arkansas, USA, during 2005–2020. We found that adult harvest probabilities declined overall during the study and adult survival probabilities increased. Annual abundances of juvenile geese (≤1 year old) declined during the study, whereas there was no detectable trend in abundance of the adult population over time. Most Canada geese breeding in Arkansas were shot in Arkansas, indicating potential for population dynamics to be influenced largely by state-specific harvest regulations. However, our results suggest that harvest liberalization as a management tool may have limited capacity to further influence population dynamics of Canada geese. Declines in productivity and recruitment likely had a greater influence on the similar observed declines in juvenile and adult abundances, respectively, during our study. More research is needed to better understand the ecological mechanism affecting the population dynamics of Canada geese in both urban and rural environments.

Arkansas↗
USGS2026

Predicted habitat use for reintroduced grizzly bears in the transboundary North Cascades ecosystem

Grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) were once numerous in the North Cascades transboundary region of Washington State (United States) and British Columbia (Canada); however, few remain today. To support ongoing reintroduction evaluations, we used simulations based on movement models developed in the Northern Rocky Mountains to predict habitat use by a small founding group of grizzly bears in the North Cascades during the early stages of reintroduction. These simulations represent movements across a spatially explicit landscape based on individual-specific selection and movement parameters. We first evaluated predictive performance in three nearby populations of grizzly bears in the Squamish-Lillooet, McGillvary Mountains, and North Stein-Nahatlatch regions of the Coast Mountains, British Columbia. After applying an elevation-based calibration, predicted habitat use showed strong agreement with GPS location data from 73 collared bears. Across population–sex subgroups, Spearman rank correlations were ≥0.95, with 69.2%–83.3% of locations occurring within the top five habitat classes (covering 50% of mapped habitat) and 17.1%–36.2% in the top class (representing 10%). Overall, 24.5% and 77.9% of locations fell within the top class and top five classes, respectively. Seasonal validation showed strongest predictive performance from May to late summer or fall. Model predictions for the North Cascades indicate that habitat use during early reintroduction is likely to be concentrated in the central and northern mountainous portions of the ecosystem along the US–Canada border. These maps can guide recovery planning when no local bear data are yet available in the North Cascades transboundary region.

British Columbia, Washington↗
USGS2026

Holistic understanding of uncertainty for collaborative and proactive global change decision making

Global change is accelerating and pushing the planet's ecosystems beyond the range of historical observations, creating increasing uncertainty in future system conditions. Despite general agreement that proactive environmental action is warranted, environmental decision conversations often end by identifying additional data needed to reduce uncertainty before taking novel action. Given the inherent uncertainty in complex issues such as global change, quantitative data alone are likely insufficient to support proactive environmental action. Holistic understanding of uncertainty includes scientific quantification of uncertainty paired with emotional responses and transcendental grounding to help people work together toward proactive action in uncertain decision contexts. Holistic understanding arises from the four ways in which humans perceive the world, termed the Four Realms: Physical (e.g., how I observe), Mental (e.g., how I think), Emotional (e.g., how I feel), and Transcendental (e.g., how I connect to greater meaning or purpose). Environmental scientists and decision makers are generally trained in Physical and Mental Realm observation and analysis, but not in how to apply Emotional and Transcendental Realm understanding. Emotional and Transcendental processing occurs in scientists and decision makers whether it is acknowledged or not and contributes to different people interpreting the same information in different ways. Thus, when the role of Emotional and Transcendental Realms in an individual's interpretation process is not understood, it can derail conversations and perpetuate the status quo. Explicitly recognizing all Four Realms can bring people together across differences and inspire shared, novel decision making even in increasing uncertainty. To illustrate the benefits of holistic understanding, we share stories from our experiences in environmental decision contexts. Because accessing the Four Realms requires experiential and embodied techniques, while still relying on core scientific tenets of observation and analysis, we also present techniques for readers to learn to feel their own emotional understanding and connect to their own transcendental understanding. Holistic understanding can enhance data-driven decisions by recognizing that human responses to uncertainty inherently include interactions between emotions, thoughts, transcendental connections, and behavior. Ultimately, holistic understanding can help anchor data-driven decisions in intra- and interpersonal connections, inspiring action in the face of uncertainty.

Ecosphere↗