Importance of abiotic stress as a range‐limit determinant for European plants: insights from species responses to climatic gradients

By S. Normand, U. Treier, C. Randin, P. Vittoz, Antoine Guisan, Jens‐Christian Svenning. 2009

235 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ac5289cf9fc9c238a37b786235e4427c02599c3e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecological Modeling

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Global patterns in the shape of species geographical ranges reveal range determinants (2012, background): “Such effects could be considered a component of macroclimatic limitations (Normand et al. , 2009).”
A comprehensive evaluation of predictive performance of 33 species distribution models at species and community levels (2019, background): “…environmental predictors (Austin et al. 2009), there is evidence that the relationship is likely skewed and there is complete lack of information regarding the actual relationships when several variables interact to shape the distribution of a species (Normand et al. 2009, Ara ujo et al. 2013).”
Expanding, shifting and shrinking: The impact of global warming on species’ elevational distributions (2018, background): “In addition, terrestrial species’ cool limits more closely match their thermal tolerance limits (Sunday, Bates, & Dulvy, 2012) and are better predicted by climate (Normand et al., 2009), compared to warm range limits.”
Climate, competition and connectivity affect future migration and ranges of European trees (2012, background): “…scales still provides valuable insights into the magnitude and the time-scale over which range shifts may occur, especially as little is known about the range restrictions of most species (Gaston, 2009), although some progress has been made (e.g. Normand et al., 2009; Zimmermann et al., 2009).”
Biotic and abiotic variables show little redundancy in explaining tree species distributions (2010, background): “…often thought to mainly constrain species distributions at equatorial/lower limits, while positive biotic interactions and abiotic factors are expected being the dominant determinants of poleward/ upper range limits (MacArthur 1972, Brown et al. 1996, Loehle 1998, Vetaas 2002, Normand et al. 2009).”
Contrasting effects of plant inter‐ and intraspecific variation on community‐level trait measures along an environmental gradient (2013, background): “Elevation is associated with changes in temperature and other environmental factors such as soil nutrient availability and soil water content (K€ orner 2007; Normand et al. 2009).”
A quantitative synthesis of the importance of variables used in MaxEnt species distribution models (2017, background): “For instance, tropical species are limited by heat tolerance (e.g. Ara ujo et al., 2013), whereas temperate species are limited by cold toler- ance (e.g. Normand et al., 2009).”
Functional diversity supports the physiological tolerance hypothesis for plant species richness along climatic gradients (2014, background): “Many correlative studies of species richness appear to support this hypothesis (Hawkins, Porter & Diniz 2003; Normand et al. 2009; Kessler et al. 2011).”
Seasonal drought limits tree species across the Neotropics (2017, background): “Thus, in less physiologically stressful environments, tropical tree species’ occurrences could be limited by stronger biotic interactions, both with competitors and natural enemies (MacArthur 1972, Normand et al. 2009).”
Selecting predictors to maximize the transferability of species distribution models: lessons from cross‐continental plant invasions (2017, background): “…one or another extremity of the gradient and it has been 310 shown that the most stressful extremity of the gradient is more predictable by SDMs because it 311 corresponds to physiological limits affecting the fundamental niche (Normand et al., 2009; 312 Maiorano et al., 2013; Araújo et al., 2013).”
Co‐occurrence patterns of trees along macro‐climatic gradients and their potential influence on the present and future distribution of Fagus sylvatica L. (2011, background): “Still largely missing, however, is empirical quantification of the strength of interspecific competition along large-scale climate gradients (but see Normand et al., 2009).”