An operational definition of the biome for global change research.

Biomes are constructs for organising knowledge on the structure and functioning of the world's ecosystems, and serve as useful units for monitoring how the biosphere responds to anthropogenic drivers, including climate change. The current practice of delimiting biomes relies on expert knowledge. Recent studies have questioned the value of such biome maps for comparative ecology and global-change research, partly due to their subjective origin. Here we propose a flexible method for developing biome maps objectively. The method uses range modelling of several thousands of plant species to reveal spatial attractors for different growth-form assemblages that define biomes. The workflow is illustrated using distribution data from 23 500 African plant species. In an example application, we create a biome map for Africa and use the fitted species models to project biome shifts. In a second example, we map gradients of growth-form suitability that can be used to identify sites for comparative ecology. This method provides a flexible framework that (1) allows a range of biome types to be defined according to user needs and (2) enables projections of biome changes that emerge purely from the individualistic responses of plant species to environmental changes.

Transferability of correlative and process-based species distribution models revisited: A response to Booth.

Here, we respond to Booth's criticism of our paper, "Predictive ability of a process-based versus a correlative species distribution model." Booth argues that our usage of the MaxEnt model was flawed and that the conclusions of our paper are by implication flawed. We respond by clarifying that the error Booth implies we made was not made in our analysis, and we repeat statements from the original manuscript which anticipated such criticisms. In addition, we illustrate that using BIOCLIM variables in a MaxEnt analysis as recommended by Booth does not change the conclusions of the original analysis. That is, high performance in the training data domain did not equate to reliable predictions in novel data domains, and the process model transferred into novel data domains better than the correlative model did. We conclude by discussing a hidden implication of our study, namely, that process-based SDMs negate the need for BIOCLIM-type variables and therefore reframe the variable selection problem in species distribution modeling.

Predictive ability of a process-based versus a correlative species distribution model.

Species distribution modeling is a widely used tool in many branches of ecology and evolution. Evaluations of the transferability of species distribution models-their ability to predict the distribution of species in independent data domains-are, however, rare. In this study, we contrast the transferability of a process-based and a correlative species distribution model. Our case study uses 664 Australian eucalypt and acacia species. We estimate models for these species using data from their native Australia and then assess whether these models can predict the adventive range of these species. We find that the correlative model-MaxEnt-has a superior ability to describe the data in the training data domain (Australia) and that the process-based model-TTR-SDM-has a superior ability to predict the distribution of the study species outside of Australia. The implication of this analysis, that process-based models may be more appropriate than correlative models when making projections outside of the domain of the training data, needs to be tested in other case studies.