Next Article in Journal
Unrecognised Ant Megadiversity in the Australian Monsoonal Tropics III: The Meranoplus ajax Forel Complex
Next Article in Special Issue
Too Warm and Too Dry—Decline and Threat of the Subarctic-Subalpine Liverwort Hygrobiella laxifolia in a Low Mountain Range in Central Europe under the Conditions of Climate Change
Previous Article in Journal
Status of Marine Debris Damage to Adult and Young Black-Tailed Gulls (Larus crassirostris) in Their Breeding Colonies in South Korea
Previous Article in Special Issue
Potential Distribution of Bryophyte, Entodon challengeri (Entodontaceae), under Climate Warming in China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diversity
Volume 16
Issue 2
10.3390/d16020125
diversity-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Predicting the Future Distribution of Leucobryum aduncum under Climate Change

by
Puwadol Chawengkul
1,
Patsakorn Tiwutanon
1,
Nuttha Sanevas
1 and
Ekaphan Kraichak
1,2,*
1
Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand
2
Biodiversity Center, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diversity 2024, 16(2), 125; https://doi.org/10.3390/d16020125
Submission received: 29 December 2023 / Revised: 8 February 2024 / Accepted: 13 February 2024 / Published: 15 February 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Distribution of Bryophytes in a Changing World)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Leucobryum aduncum is a moss species reported in many Southeast Asian regions, often found in forests with a high humidity. Climate change may impact the future distribution of this species. This study aimed to model the current distribution and predict the impact of climate change on L. aduncum distribution in the next 50 years across Southeast Asia. In the process, relevant climate variables in the distribution of the species were also identified. The occurrence data of this species with current and future climate models from CMIP6 under moderate (SSP2) scenarios were used to predict current and future L. aduncum distributions. Under the current climate, the predicted suitable areas for L. aduncum included most mountainous areas. However, many Southeast Asian areas showed a lower probability of finding this species in the next 50 years. The distribution area of this species will dramatically decrease by 50.16% in the current area. The most important ecological variables included the “mean temperature of the driest quarter” and the “annual temperature range”. This study suggests the possible impacts of an increased temperature and the scale of climate change on the distribution of sensitive plants like bryophytes.

1. Introduction

Bryophytes are non-vascular plants that usually grow in an environment with high moisture [1]. In the forest ecosystem, they assist in storing a large amount of water, which plays an important role in the water balance and helps to reduce erosion along streams and landslides. They grow in high areas above sea level and are the biological indicators of an abundant environment with high moisture. Furthermore, they provide microhabitats for small animals, insects, and microorganisms, food for some beetles, and a seedling bed for germination [2,3]. Bryophytes are also pioneer plants that grow in high areas above sea level, flooded areas, and even wastelands [4]. After bryophytes die, they accumulate into humus soil that promotes other land plants. Furthermore, they also reduce erosion along streams and remove heavy metal ions from the wastewater [5].
The distribution of bryophytes has been particularly sensitive to the climate, especially temperature and precipitation. The success of colonization relies more on suitable ecological conditions than the dispersal process [6]. The seasonal distribution of rainfall and temperatures are key to maintaining the diversity of bryophyte communities [7]. In Southeast Asia, water and precipitation played a dominant role in describing the variation of bryophyte species diversity, while woody species were much more strongly affected by temperature [8]. The interaction between water and energy might play an important role. Furthermore, the richness of the sampling scale is mainly affected by the richness of the local area, which is also controlled by the climate [9].
Leucobryum is a unique group of bryophytes, forming cushions in moist habitats, such as on soil, bark, and even wet rock. The plants are whitish-green when moist and become whitish when dry. Fourteen species of Leucobryum were recorded in many areas around Southeast Asia [10], indicating the diversity hotspot of Leucobryum and the abundance of the forest in Southeast Asia. However, a unified database on the species occurrence of Leucobryum in Southeast Asia is still unavailable. Many areas in Southeast Asia lack surveys but may have a high potential to find these species, and still require to focus more on area-based research on species diversity [11].
Leucobryum aduncum is one of the most common species of Leucobryum in Southeast Asia. It is widely distributed from southern China to New Guinea (Figure 1a). This species is often found growing in the shade of trees in areas with high moisture, such as moist rocks under forests or locations with high rainfall [12,13,14]. Nowadays, L. aduncum is at a high risk of population decline due to both the direct and indirect activities of humans. Because of its beautiful appearance and incredible ability to absorb water, it is heavily harvested from the forest for various commercial purposes, including as a potting medium, soil cover, and for terrarium use. In many groups of mosses, climate change may impact the population size [15,16,17,18,19,20] and genetic diversity [21,22] due to the anthropogenic warming of the climate. However, such effects have not been studied in Leucobryum.
Species distribution modeling (SDM) is a tool for predicting the potential distributions of any living organisms and the relationship between the occurrences of the species and ecological variables. The results of the model will present the probability of finding the species in each area. SDM has been widely used in previous studies across various types of areas (such as terrestrial, freshwater, and marine), including the study of bryophyte species distribution [23,24].
Leucobryum aduncum provides an intriguing case study for predicting responses to climate change, because of its unique morphological and ecological characteristics. L. aduncum can be found in various habitats, from beach forests to montane forests [14,25], suggesting a broad tolerance range. Unlike typical bryophytes, this species thrives in a relatively arid environment, owing to its capacity to retain extra water within its water-storage cells (Figure 1b) and between plants in a cushion [26]. Additionally, the leaf apex features undulate and spinosely porated cells that help to improve water-intake efficiency [14] (Figure 1c). Identifying the relevant climatic variables for L. aduncum distribution will deepen our understanding of the physiological and ecological requirements for this species. The results will help us to discover possible habitats to find L. aduncum, and to plan for the new survey to fill our knowledge gaps. Furthermore, this tool can also predict the potential distributions of L. aduncum using the ecological variables related to future climatic data. The distributions of these species may change in the future due to the effect of climate change.
This study aimed to predict the impact of climate change on L. aduncum distribution in the next 50 years and to determine the ecological variables related to the species distribution of this species in Southeast Asia. The current work employed the Maxent algorithm with selected bioclimatic variables to predict the current distribution. Future climate variables from six possible CMIP6 scenarios were used to predict the future distribution. The results from the study would provide us with insights into the impact of climate change and possible conservation plans for this understudied group of plants.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data Acquisition

The workflow of species distribution modeling in this study is outlined in Figure 2. The occurrences of Leucobryum aduncum distribution in Southeast Asia were downloaded from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF: https://www.gbif.org/, accessed on 3 October 2022) and extracted from herbarium specimen labels deposited in the herbarium of the Department of Botany at the Kasetsart University, Bangkok Forest (BKF), Burapha University, and Prince of Songkla University (PSU) Herbaria. Southeast Asia was defined by the area between the latitude of 10° S and 23° N and the latitude of 95° E and 140° E. Leucobryum aduncum var. scalare was excluded from the analysis due to its reclassification as a separate species [14]. The occurrence data were pre-processed via converting latitude and longitude coordinates from a degrees/minutes/seconds (DMS) to a decimal degrees (DDs) format using Microsoft Excel version 2307. Finally, 172 occurrences were exported as a .csv file for generating a species distribution model. Due to the limitation in sampling size, all occurrences were used for modeling. However, to reduce the risk of spatial autocorrelation, the occurrences were split into four equally sized spatial blocks for the subsequent analyses.
The 19 bioclimatic variables were retrieved from WorldClim version 2.1 [27] at a resolution of 2.5 arc-minutes (from https://www.worldclim.org/, accessed on 3 October 2022). The variables included the annual mean temperature (bio1), the mean diurnal range (bio2), the isothermality (bio3), the temperature seasonality (bio4), the maximum temperature of the warmest month (bio5), the minimum temperature of the coldest month (bio6), the annual temperature range (bio7), the mean temperature of the wettest quarter (bio8), the mean temperature of the driest quarter (bio9), the mean temperature of the warmest quarter (bio10), the mean temperature of the coldest quarter (bio11), the annual precipitation (bio12), the precipitation of the wettest month (bio13), the precipitation of the driest month (bio14), the precipitation seasonality (bio15), the precipitation of the wettest quarter (bio16), the precipitation of the driest quarter (bio17), the precipitation of the warmest quarter (bio18), and the precipitation of the coldest quarter (bio19). These variables are often used in species distribution modeling and could be correlated with the distribution of bryophytes.

2.2. Current Distribution Modeling

A thousand random background points were created in addition to the observed occurrences. The random cross-validation techniques were avoided, due to an increased underestimation of the prediction error [28]. The occurrences of Leucobryum aduncum and background points were separated into four equally sized blocks for spatial block cross-validation using the ENMeval package version 2.0.4 [29] in R software version 4.3.1 [30]. Then, highly correlated variables were removed using the variable selection function to avoid over-fitting the model from multicollinearity. The model hyperparameters were also tuned using the SDMtune package version 1.3.1 [31] in R software. The spatially related bioclimatic variables were removed by performing a leave-one-out jackknife test among the correlated variables, removing the variable with a Spearman’s correlation coefficient greater than 0.7. Then, the variable that decreased the model performance in terms of the area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC or AUC) was also removed. All species distribution models in this study were performed with Maxent algorithms [32] in the SDMtune package. The hyperparameter which provided the highest AUC was selected, including 1.5 regularization multiplier, linear, and quadratic transformations of input covariates. The species distribution maps and response curves of each important variable were also plotted.

2.3. Predicting Future Distribution

The global climatic models (GCMs) were part of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) of the IPCC’s sixth assessment report (AR6). Six GCMs, including CNRM-CM6-1, EC-Earth3-Veg, MPIESM1-2-HR, MPI-ESM1-2-LR, MRI-ESM2-0, and UKESM1-0-LL, from the historical period (1970 to 2000) and future period (2061 to 2080) were selected as the most suitable models for Southeast Asia according to the previous literature [33,34,35,36]. This study selected the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP2-4.5) to represent the moderate scenario for greenhouse gas emissions [37]. The current and future model predictions were performed using historical and future GCMs, the same method as in the previous section.
To calculate the change in distribution between the current and future models, we used the cloglog threshold equal to 0.57, which gives maximum training sensitivity plus specificity, to classify the area into presence and absence. Finally, the current and future distributions were compared to calculate the changes in distributions in the next 50 years. To evaluate the uncertainty among GCMs, we also created a consensus map among the six GCMs [38]. The same threshold at 0.57 was used to identify the predicted presence in each scenario.

3. Results

3.1. Selection of Climate Variables

After removing the highly related bioclimatic variables, six of the topmost important variables were selected to perform SDM. These variables included the mean diurnal range (bio2), the maximum temperature of the warmest quarter (bio5), the annual temperature range (bio7), the mean temperature of the driest quarter (bio9), the annual precipitation (bio12), and the precipitation of the warmest quarter (bio18). Among the selected variables, the two most important variables were the mean temperature of the driest quarter (bio9) and the annual temperature range (bio7), together accounting for 67.48% of permutation importance (Table 1).
The response curves of the two most important variables (the mean temperature of the driest quarter and the annual temperature range) are shown in Figure 3. The highest occurrence probability was found when the mean temperature of the driest quarter was lower than 22 °C and when the annual temperature range (the mean difference between the maximum and minimum monthly temperatures) was lower than 12 °C.
The other variables that were removed during the model selection include the mean temperature (bio1), the isothermality (bio3), the temperature seasonality (bio4), the min temperature of the coldest month (bio6), the mean temperature of the wettest quarter (bio8), the mean temperature of the warmest quarter (bio10), the mean temperature of the coldest quarter (bio11), the precipitation of the wettest month (bio13), the precipitation of the driest month (bio14), the precipitation seasonality (bio15), the precipitation of the wettest quarter (bio16), the precipitation of the driest quarter (bio17), and the precipitation of the coldest quarter (bio19).

3.2. Current and Future Distribution

With the Maxent algorithm, the current distribution modeling with six climate variables yielded a reasonable performance at the AUC value of 0.736. As for the future distribution, six climate scenarios, including CNRM-CM6-1, EC-Earth3-Veg, MPIESM1-2-HR, MPI-ESM1-2-LR, MRI-ESM2-0, and UKESM1-0-LL, revealed a similar future distribution (Supplementary Figures S1–S6) of L. aduncum. The consensus map showed that the predicted future distributions were mostly consistent across the six scenarios (Figure 4 and Table 2). The predicted current distribution included mostly the mountainous areas of Eastern Myanmar, Western Myanmar, Southern Vietnam, Northern Thailand, Upper Central Thailand, Western Thailand, Northern Borneo, North Sumatra, South Sumatra, West Java, Bali, Sulawesi, Maluku Islands, Lesser Sundar Islands, and West Papua (Figure 5a,c). Because the six scenarios showed similar results, all six models were averaged into a single future distribution map and showed a similar distribution to the current one, but shrinking in areas in every region (Figure 5b,d).

3.3. Changes in Future Distribution

At the threshold of 0.57, the suitable area for L. aduncum presence was estimated to cover 804,957.50 km2 or 17.46% of the studied area in Southeast Asia. The predicted future distribution showed that the suitable area would likely drop to 411,563.30 km2, or 8.93% of the studied area, in 2061–2080 (Table 3). Most of the current distribution in the mountainous areas would shrink, except for some areas in Northern Vietnam (Figure 6).
Approximately 403,670 km2, or 50% of the predicted current distribution area, would no longer be suitable for L. aduncum in 2061–2080. These areas were mostly at the margin of the current distribution. The core areas of the current distribution would continue to accommodate L. aduncum, accounting for 401,130 km2 (50% of the predicted current distribution area). The areas that experience a gain in distribution are relatively small in Northern Vietnam, accounting for 10,433 km2 (Table 4).

4. Discussion

4.1. Predicted Distribution of L. aduncum

Species distribution modeling of L. aduncum showed that the mean temperature of the driest quarter and the annual temperature range were the most important variables in determining the occurrence of the species. The species showed the highest probability of occurrence at a relatively low temperature (<22 °C) and small temperature range (<12 °C). Precipitation factors played a less dominant role in determining the distribution of L. aduncum, suggesting that its capacity to retain additional water in hyaline cells enables it to thrive across a diverse range of water environments.
About 17% of Southeast Asia was predicted to be suitable for L. aduncum under the current climate conditions. Most suitable areas were limited to areas with high elevation and, subsequently, lower temperatures and smaller temperature ranges. This finding is consistent with the reported distribution of the genus Leucobryum in Asia [10].
The future climate in 2061–2080 indicated a warmer and generally drier climate than the current one. Subsequently, the predicted suitable areas for L. aduncum would be reduced by more than half compared to the current distribution. The disappearance of the present areas was mostly at the margin of the current distribution, with an exception for relatively small areas in Northern Vietnam. This shift is likely the result of an increased temperature at the lower elevation, subsequently making the distribution of this moss species even more restricted to the highlands, similar to previous studies [23,24].

4.2. Temperature and L. aduncum Distribution

The current study showed that the two most important variables for predicting L. aduncum distribution were related to temperature. For bryophytes, temperature determines the biochemical functioning and available water needed for photosynthesis. Plants will be dormant if water sources are lacking and the temperature is high. Furthermore, some research suggested some epiphytic species can be used as an indicator of changes in the microclimate. Some researchers found that microclimate values, including maximum temperature and minimum humidity, have a positive relationship with the community composition of bryophytes [39].
A decline in bryophyte richness and diversity is associated with an increased temperature by 1.5–3 °C in situ [40]. Therefore, global change may lead to the decreasing diversity of bryophytes, especially changes in species composition patterns. In long-term warming experiments in the Arctic and sub-Arctic [41], the species richness of mosses, except for Sphagnum, would decrease with increasing temperature. The Sphagnum has a higher performance to resist in higher relative temperatures compared to other northern mosses. Changes in the abundance of some bryophyte species can be bioindicators for increasing temperature. While Leucobryum species are superficially similar to Sphagnum in their morphology, their ecological requirements are vastly different. Most Leucobryum species are distributed in the tropics, where the effects of increasing temperatures are less well-documented. Our study on L. aduncum provides additional evidence for an adverse effect of increasing temperatures on the distribution of tropical bryophytes.
Interestingly, Leucobryum aduncum appears to be less sensitive to precipitation. As non-vascular plants, bryophytes are poikilohydric. They are likely to require direct regulation through ambient humidity and, therefore, rely on atmospheric precipitations for water uptake. However, Leucobryum is distinctive in that its tissues contain empty and specialized water-holding hyaline cells, which possess the incredible ability to absorb water, exceeding several times their own dry weight. Our studied species also contains the projecting end of undulate and spinosely porated cells at the leaf apex (Figure 1c), which may help further improve their water-holding capacity [42]. The species of this genus often form a cushion, allowing a greater water-holding capacity than typical bryophytes, even in a dry environment. Our results are consistent with the previous study of Leucobryum glaucum in Great Britain that exhibits the highest growth rates during summer [43]. The growth of these cushions is more closely associated with temperature than with precipitation. A previous species distribution modeling study also found that higher values of annual temperature range over the year led to a lower habitat suitability for bryophytes of Orthotricaceae [44]. A temperature increase in the tropics could be more severe than the change in precipitation and could subsequently impact the distribution of tropical bryophytes.

4.3. Other Important Variables for Bryophyte Distribution

The diversity of bryophytes is related to many additional ecological factors [45,46,47], including biotic factors such as grazing and interaction with vascular plants, and physical factors such as habitat diversity, island biogeography, temperature [48], and precipitation [42]. Understanding the relationships of these factors with bryophyte diversity will help us to predict the distribution pattern of bryophytes across regional scales. It will benefit conservation and research in the global warming situation [49]. Moreover, climate change will also affect the stands and compositions of trees, which will subsequently shape microclimatic conditions in ecosystems. In the current study, we have not included the potential changes in vascular plant distribution as a factor for the future distribution of L. aduncum because we still have a limited understanding of how vascular plant communities affect distribution bryophytes. Future species distribution modeling of bryophytes should explore these interactions further.

5. Conclusions

Our study used the available climate data and current occurrences to perform the species distribution modeling of Leucobryum aduncum. We identified suitable areas for the species across Southeast Asia, but the prediction for the future distribution showed a dramatic decrease in suitable areas, mostly due to the increased temperature and temperature range over the next fifty years. The approach taken in the current study can be applied to other bryophyte species to understand the diverse scenarios for plant distribution and the conservation of particularly sensitive groups like tropical bryophytes.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/d16020125/s1, Figures S1–S6: Future 2061–2080, CMIP6 SSP2-4.5 from six models.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.C., E.K. and N.S.; methodology, P.C. and E.K.; formal analysis, P.C.; investigation, P.C.; resources, P.T.; data curation, P.C. and P.T.; writing—original draft preparation, P.C.; writing—review and editing, E.K., P.T. and N.S.; visualization, P.C.; supervision, E.K. and N.S.; project administration, E.K.; funding acquisition, P.C., P.T. and E.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the scholarship to P.C. from the Development and Promotion of Science and Technology Talents Project (DPST) under the Royal Thai Government. For additional funding for E.K. and P.T., the authors would like to thank Kasetsart University for research funding through the Biodiversity Center at Kasetsart University.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

A dataset and R codes for modeling are available at https://github.com/pooh39777/sdm-leucobryum (accessed on 27 December 2023).

Acknowledgments

We thank Linda Beaumont from the Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University, NSW, for helping with SDM techniques and improving our models.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Wang, S.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, Z. Bryophyte communities as biomonitors of environmental factors in the Goujiang karst bauxite, southwestern China. Sci. Total Environ. 2015, 538, 270–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Frahm, J.P.; Trustees, S.P. Mosses and Liverworts of Mt. Kinabalu; Sabah Parks Trustees: Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  3. Kostka, J.E.; Weston, D.J.; Glass, J.B.; Lilleskov, E.A.; Shaw, A.J.; Turetsky, M.R. The Sphagnum microbiome: New insights from an ancient plant lineage. New Phytol. 2016, 211, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Song, L.; Ma, W.-Z.; Yao, Y.-L.; Liu, W.-Y.; Li, S.; Chen, K.; Lu, H.-Z.; Cao, M.; Sun, Z.-H.; Tan, Z.-H.; et al. Bole bryophyte diversity and distribution patterns along three altitudinal gradients in Yunnan, China. J. Veg. Sci. 2015, 26, 576–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sandhi, A.; Landberg, T.; Greger, M. Phytofiltration of arsenic by aquatic moss (Warnstorfia fluitans). Environ. Pollut. 2018, 237, 1098–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Aranda, S.C.; Gabriel, R.; Borges, P.A.V.; Santos, A.M.C.; De Azevedo, E.B.; Patiño, J.; Hortal, J.; Lobo, J.M. Geographical, temporal and environmental determinants of bryophyte species richness in the Macaronesian Islands. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e101786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Bes, M.; Corbera, J.; Sayol, F.; Bagaria, G.; Jover, M.; Preece, C.; Viza, A.; Sabater, F.; Fernández-Martínez, M. On the influence of water conductivity, pH and climate on bryophyte assemblages in Catalan semi-natural springs. J. Bryol. 2018, 40, 149–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chen, S.-B.; Ferry Slik, J.W.; Gao, J.; Mao, L.-F.; Bi, M.-J.; Shen, M.-W.; Zhou, K.-X. Latitudinal diversity gradients in bryophytes and woody plants: Roles of temperature and water availability. J. Syst. Evol. 2015, 53, 535–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Medina, N.G.; Albertos, B.; Lara, F.; Mazimpaka, V.; Garilleti, R.; Draper, D.; Hortal, J. Species richness of epiphytic bryophytes: Drivers across scales on the edge of the Mediterranean. Ecography 2014, 37, 80–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yamaguchi, T. A revision of the genus Leucobryum (Musci) in Asia. J. Hattori Bot. Lab. 1993, 73, 1–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sukkharak, P.; Chantanaorrapint, S. Bryophyte studies in Thailand: Past, present, and future. Cryptogam. Bryol. 2014, 35, 5–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bang-Juan, L.; He, S. Leucobryaceae. In Moss Flora of China; Chien, G., Crosby, M., He, S., Eds.; Missouri Botanical Garden: St. Louis, MO, USA, 1999; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
  13. Norhazrina, N.; Nadirah, I.; Syazwana, N.; Asyifaa, S.; Maideen, H.M.K. The moss flora of Ulu Gombak Forest Reserve, Gombak, Selangor, Malaysia. The 2018 UKM FST Postgraduate Colloquium. In Proceedings of the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Faculty of Science and Technology 2018 Postgraduate Colloquium, Selangor, Malaysia, 4–6 April 2018. [Google Scholar]
  14. Tiwutanon, P.; Chaiyasut, K.; Lumbsch, H.T.; Kraichak, E. Resurrection of Leucobryumscalare Müll.Hal. ex M.Fleisch. (Bryophyta, Leucobryaceae) based on phylogenetic and morphometric evidence. PhytoKeys 2023, 222, 27–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kou, J.; Wang, T.; Yu, F.; Sun, Y.; Feng, C.; Shao, X. The moss genus Didymodon as an indicator of climate change on the Tibetan Plateau. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 113, 106204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wen, A.; Wu, T.; Zhu, X.; Li, R.; Wu, X.; Chen, J.; Qiao, Y.; Ni, J.; Ma, W.; Li, X.; et al. Changes in the spatial distribution of Bryophytes on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau under CMIP6 future projections. Environ. Earth Sci. 2021, 81, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Alatalo, J.M.; Jagerbrand, A.K.; Erfanian, M.B.; Chen, S.; Sun, S.Q.; Molau, U. Bryophyte cover and richness decline after 18 years of experimental warming in alpine Sweden. AoB Plants 2020, 12, plaa061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zanatta, F.; Engler, R.; Collart, F.; Broennimann, O.; Mateo, R.G.; Papp, B.; Munoz, J.; Baurain, D.; Guisan, A.; Vanderpoorten, A. Bryophytes are predicted to lag behind future climate change despite their high dispersal capacities. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 5601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Wierzcholska, S.; Dyderski, M.K.; Jagodziński, A.M. Potential distribution of an epiphytic bryophyte depends on climate and forest continuity. Glob. Planet. Change 2020, 193, 103270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Cong, M.; Jian, M.; Xu, Y.; Tang, L.; Li, J.; Yang, W.; Zhu, Y. Geographical distribution and migration routes of the medical bryophyte, Climacium dendroides, under climate warming in China. Plant Biosyst.—Int. J. Deal. All Asp. Plant Biol. 2021, 156, 663–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Désamoré, A.; Laenen, B.; Stech, M.; Papp, B.; Hedenäs, L.; Mateo, R.G.; Vanderpoorten, A. How do temperate bryophytes face the challenge of a changing environment? Lessons from the past and predictions for the future. Glob. Change Biol. 2012, 18, 2915–2924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Merinero, S.; Dahlberg, C.J.; Ehrlen, J.; Hylander, K. Intraspecific variation influences performance of moss transplants along microclimate gradients. Ecology 2020, 101, e02999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Cerrejón, C.; Valeria, O.; Mansuy, N.; Barbé, M.; Fenton, N.J. Predictive mapping of bryophyte richness patterns in boreal forests using species distribution models and remote sensing data. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 119, 106826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kruijer, H.J.D.; Raes, N.; Stech, M. Modelling the distribution of the moss species Hypopterygium tamarisci (Hypopterygiaceae, Bryophyta) in Central and South America. Nova Hedwig. 2010, 91, 399–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Enroth, J. The Bryophytes of Sabah (North Borneo) with Special Reference to the BRYOTROP Transect of Mount Kinabalu. IV. Leucobryaceae (Bryopsida). Willdenowia 1989, 18, 529–554. [Google Scholar]
  26. Ligrone, R. Studies on the leaf structure in some species of Leucobryaceae. III. Leucobryum sanctum (Brid.) Hampe and Leucobryum sp. (Leucobryeae). J. Bryol. 2013, 13, 411–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Fick, S.E.; Hijmans, R.J. WorldClim 2: New 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 2017, 37, 4302–4315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Valavi, R.; Elith, J.; Lahoz-Monfort, J.J.; Guillera-Arroita, G.; Warton, D. blockCV: An r package for generating spatially or environmentally separated folds for k-fold cross-validation of species distribution models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2018, 10, 225–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Muscarella, R.; Galante, P.J.; Soley-Guardia, M.; Boria, R.A.; Kass, J.M.; Uriarte, M.; Anderson, R.P.; McPherson, J. ENMeval: An R package for conducting spatially independent evaluations and estimating optimal model complexity for Maxent ecological niche models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2014, 5, 1198–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Found. Stat. Comput. 2023, 13, 2. [Google Scholar]
  31. Vignali, S.; Barras, A.G.; Arlettaz, R.; Braunisch, V. SDMtune: An R package to tune and evaluate species distribution models. Ecol. Evol. 2020, 10, 11488–11506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Phillips, S.J.; Anderson, R.P.; Schapire, R.E. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol. Model. 2006, 190, 231–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ge, F.; Zhu, S.; Luo, H.; Zhi, X.; Wang, H. Future changes in precipitation extremes over Southeast Asia: Insights from CMIP6 multi-model ensemble. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 024013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Iqbal, Z.; Shahid, S.; Ahmed, K.; Ismail, T.; Ziarh, G.F.; Chung, E.-S.; Wang, X. Evaluation of CMIP6 GCM rainfall in mainland Southeast Asia. Atmos. Res. 2021, 254, 105525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kamworapan, S.; Bich Thao, P.T.; Gheewala, S.H.; Pimonsree, S.; Prueksakorn, K. Evaluation of CMIP6 GCMs for simulations of temperature over Thailand and nearby areas in the early 21st century. Heliyon 2021, 7, e08263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Supharatid, S.; Aribarg, T.; Nafung, J. Bias-corrected CMIP6 climate model projection over Southeast Asia. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2022, 147, 669–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fricko, O.; Havlik, P.; Rogelj, J.; Klimont, Z.; Gusti, M.; Johnson, N.; Kolp, P.; Strubegger, M.; Valin, H.; Amann, M.; et al. The marker quantification of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 2: A middle-of-the-road scenario for the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 2017, 42, 251–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Belote, R.T.; Carroll, C.; Martinuzzi, S.; Michalak, J.; Williams, J.W.; Williamson, M.A.; Aplet, G.H. Assessing agreement among alternative climate change projections to inform conservation recommendations in the contiguous United States. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 9441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sporn, S.G.; Bos, M.M.; Hoffstätter-Müncheberg, M.; Kessler, M.; Gradstein, S.R. Microclimate determines community composition but not richness of epiphytic understory bryophytes of rainforest and cacao agroforests in Indonesia. Funct. Plant Biol. 2009, 36, 171–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Jägerbrand, A.K.; Lindblad, K.E.M.; Björk, R.G.; Alatalo, J.M.; Molau, U. Bryophyte and Lichen Diversity Under Simulated Environmental Change Compared with Observed Variation in Unmanipulated Alpine Tundra. Biodivers. Conserv. 2006, 15, 4453–4475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Lang, S.I.; Cornelissen, J.H.C.; Shaver, G.R.; Ahrens, M.; Callaghan, T.V.; Molau, U.; Ter Braak, C.J.F.; Hölzer, A.; Aerts, R. Arctic warming on two continents has consistent negative effects on lichen diversity and mixed effects on bryophyte diversity. Glob. Change Biol. 2012, 18, 1096–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Glime, J.M. Chapter 7—Water Relations. In Bryophyte Ecology Volume 1: Physiological Ecology; Michigan Technological University: Houghton, MI, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  43. Bates, J.W. Growth of Leucobryum glaucum cushions In a Berkshire oakwood. J. Bryol. 1989, 15, 785–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Číhal, L.; Kaláb, O.; Plášek, V. Modeling the distribution of rare and interesting moss species of the family Orthotrichaceae (Bryophyta) in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 2017, 86, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Vanderpoorten, A.; Goffinet, B. Physiological ecology. In Introduction to Bryophytes; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009; pp. 185–213. [Google Scholar]
  46. Proctor, M.C.F. Physiological ecology. In Bryophyte Biology, 2nd ed.; Shaw, A.J., Goffinet, B., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2008; pp. 237–268. [Google Scholar]
  47. Rydin, H. Population and community ecology of bryophytes. In Bryophyte Biology, 2nd ed.; Shaw, A.J., Goffinet, B., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2008; pp. 393–444. [Google Scholar]
  48. Glime, J.M. Chapter 10—Temperature. In Bryophyte Ecology Volume 1: Physiological Ecology; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  49. Gignac, L.D. Bryophytes as Predictors of Climate Change. In Bryophyte Ecology and Climate Change; Stark, L.R., Slack, N.G., Tuba, Z., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2011; pp. 461–482. [Google Scholar]
Diversity 16 00125 g001
Figure 1. Habit and anatomical structure of Leucobryum aduncum: (a) Habit of Tiwutanon 53 Hb. Kasetsart University; (b) cross-section of leaf showing hyaline cells and chlorophyllose cells, and (c) the projecting end of undulate and spinosely porated cells.
Figure 1. Habit and anatomical structure of Leucobryum aduncum: (a) Habit of Tiwutanon 53 Hb. Kasetsart University; (b) cross-section of leaf showing hyaline cells and chlorophyllose cells, and (c) the projecting end of undulate and spinosely porated cells.
Diversity 16 00125 g001
Diversity 16 00125 g002
Figure 2. Workflow of the species distribution modeling of Leucobryum aduncum in the current study.
Figure 2. Workflow of the species distribution modeling of Leucobryum aduncum in the current study.
Diversity 16 00125 g002
Diversity 16 00125 g003
Figure 3. Response curves: (a) mean temperature of the driest quarter (bio9); (b) annual temperature range (bio7). The red lines represent the logistic response curves and their associate 95% confidence interval. The rug lines at 0 and 1 represent the data where the species is absent and present, respectively.
Figure 3. Response curves: (a) mean temperature of the driest quarter (bio9); (b) annual temperature range (bio7). The red lines represent the logistic response curves and their associate 95% confidence interval. The rug lines at 0 and 1 represent the data where the species is absent and present, respectively.
Diversity 16 00125 g003
Diversity 16 00125 g004
Figure 4. The consensus map of future habitat suitability (2061–2080), CMIP6 SSP2-4.5 from six models.
Figure 4. The consensus map of future habitat suitability (2061–2080), CMIP6 SSP2-4.5 from six models.
Diversity 16 00125 g004
Diversity 16 00125 g005
Figure 5. Predicted current distribution and future distribution of Leucobryum aduncum in Southeast Asia: (a) current habitat suitability; (b) future habitat suitability (2061–2080); (c) current presence–absence using the threshold = 0.57; (d) future presence–absence map using the threshold = 0.57.
Figure 5. Predicted current distribution and future distribution of Leucobryum aduncum in Southeast Asia: (a) current habitat suitability; (b) future habitat suitability (2061–2080); (c) current presence–absence using the threshold = 0.57; (d) future presence–absence map using the threshold = 0.57.
Diversity 16 00125 g005
Diversity 16 00125 g006
Figure 6. Changes in suitable areas from current to future distribution (2061–2080) for Leucobryum aduncum. The dots represent current occurrence locations that were used in the model.
Figure 6. Changes in suitable areas from current to future distribution (2061–2080) for Leucobryum aduncum. The dots represent current occurrence locations that were used in the model.
Diversity 16 00125 g006
Table 1. The chosen variables for the species distribution modeling of Leucobryum aduncum, sorted from most important to least important according to permutation importance.
Table 1. The chosen variables for the species distribution modeling of Leucobryum aduncum, sorted from most important to least important according to permutation importance.
AbbreviationVariablePermutation ImportanceSD
bio9Mean temperature of the driest quarter34.985.54
bio7Annual Temperature range (bio5–bio6)32.504.14
bio18Precipitation of the warmest quarter9.935.31
bio2Mean diurnal range
(mean of monthly (max temp.–min temp.))		8.083.36
bio12Annual precipitation7.702.98
bio5Max temperature of the warmest month6.882.63
Table 2. The consensus area of the future habitat suitability (2061–2080), CMIP6 SSP2-4.5 from six models.
Table 2. The consensus area of the future habitat suitability (2061–2080), CMIP6 SSP2-4.5 from six models.
FrequencyArea (km2)Percentage
03,803,472.0082.49
1215,050.404.66
2120,246.202.61
381,702.231.77
491,205.941.98
5109,874.702.38
6189,227.404.10
Table 3. Current and future (2061–2080) areas of presence and absence for Leucobryum aduncum.
Table 3. Current and future (2061–2080) areas of presence and absence for Leucobryum aduncum.
ClassCurrent DistributionFuture Distribution
km2Percentagekm2Percentage
Absence3,805,821.0082.544,198,314.0091.07
Presence804,957.5017.46411,563.308.93
Table 4. Calculation of changes in the areas of the future scenario.
Table 4. Calculation of changes in the areas of the future scenario.
ClassAreaPercentage of Area Compared to Current Presence
km2Percentage
disappearance403,669.808.7650.16
continued absence3,794,644.0082.32-
continued presence401,130.308.7049.84
gaining10,432.990.231.30
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chawengkul, P.; Tiwutanon, P.; Sanevas, N.; Kraichak, E. Predicting the Future Distribution of Leucobryum aduncum under Climate Change. Diversity 2024, 16, 125. https://doi.org/10.3390/d16020125

AMA Style

Chawengkul P, Tiwutanon P, Sanevas N, Kraichak E. Predicting the Future Distribution of Leucobryum aduncum under Climate Change. Diversity. 2024; 16(2):125. https://doi.org/10.3390/d16020125

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chawengkul, Puwadol, Patsakorn Tiwutanon, Nuttha Sanevas, and Ekaphan Kraichak. 2024. "Predicting the Future Distribution of Leucobryum aduncum under Climate Change" Diversity 16, no. 2: 125. https://doi.org/10.3390/d16020125

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop