Next Article in Journal
Driftwood Biomass in Italy: Estimation and Characterization
Previous Article in Journal
Measuring Carbon Emissions of Pavement Construction in China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 8
Issue 8
10.3390/su8080722
sustainability-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:
Article

Predicting the Potential Distribution of Olea ferruginea in Pakistan incorporating Climate Change by Using Maxent Model

by
Uzma Ashraf
1,*,
Hassan Ali
2,
Muhammad Nawaz Chaudry
1,
Irfan Ashraf
1,3,
Adila Batool
4 and
Zafeer Saqib
5
1
College of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of the Punjab, Lahore 54590, Pakistan
2
Department of Zoology, University of the Punjab, Lahore 54590, Punjab Wildlife and Parks Department, Dera Ghazi Khan Region 32200, Pakistan
3
Strategic Policy Unit, Lahore Development Authority, Lahore 54770, Pakistan
4
Department of Space Science, University of the Punjab, Lahore 54590, Pakistan
5
Department of Environmental Science, International Islamic University, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2016, 8(8), 722; https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080722
Submission received: 24 March 2016 / Revised: 3 July 2016 / Accepted: 22 July 2016 / Published: 29 July 2016
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The potential distribution of Olea ferruginea was predicted by Maxent model for present and the upcoming hypothetical (2050) climatic scenario. O. ferruginea is an economically beneficial plant species. For predicting the potential distribution of O. ferruginea in Pakistan, Worldclim variables for current and future climatic change scenarios, digital elevation model (DEM) slope, and aspects with the occurrence point were used. Pearson correlation was used to reject highly correlated variables. A total of 219 sighting points were used in the Maxent modeling. The area under curve (AUC) value was higher than 0.98. The approach used in this study is considered useful in predicting the potential distribution of O. ferruginea species, and can be an effective tool in the conservation and restoration planning for human welfare. The results show that there is a significant impact under future bioclimatic scenarios on the potential distribution of O. ferruginea in Pakistan. There is a significant decrease in the overall distribution of O. ferruginea due to loss of habitats under current distribution range, but this will be compensated by gain of habitat at higher altitudes in the future climate change scenario (habitat shift). It is recommended that the areas predicted suitable for the O. ferruginea may be used for plantation of this species while the deforested land should be restored for human welfare.

1. Introduction

O. ferruginea is a species of the family Oleaceae. Olea ferruginea is a synonym of Olea europaea subsp cuspidate. It is known as Indian olive and Kahoo in native language. From this species a number of different products can be obtained including fodder, firewood, edible fruits, and olive oil. Thus, olive is an important tree species from an economic point of view [1,2,3,4].
Past ecological studies highlighted the relation between the climatic indicators, occurrence, and abundance of different species [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12]. The drastic change in species distributions or population status in an area is considered to be the result of land cover changes, human influence, and climate change [13,14].
Species distribution and habitat evaluation can be determined by different modelling techniques. [7,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23]. The main purpose of this research is to predict the spatial shift of O. ferruginea in response to hypothetical projected climatic values for 2050. In ecological niche modelling (ENM) environmental parameters are compared within the geographical space. ENM techniques are based on statistical methods (e.g., generalized additive models (GAMs) and generalized linear models (GLMs)) and scientist-developed machine learning methods (e.g., artificial neural networks (ANNs) and maximum entropy (Maxent)) that are based on different statistical techniques [24,25,26,27,28,29,30].
If we relate ENM results of the habitat evolution of the species, there are fewer restrictions in terms of ecological variables, e.g., layers of environment and occurrence data where choice is available. Thus, unnecessary restriction should be avoided for unbiased results [7].
In a geographical space, ENM (ecological niche modelling) predictive high output values (high threshold) at grid cells shows relatively high probability of finding a species under suitable environment [14,31,32].
To evaluate the habitat and distribution of the Olea ferruginea in Pakistan, Maxent was used in this study. The study area includes the provinces of Pakistan (Punjab, Baluchistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Sindh) and the area of Azad Jammu and Kasmir (AJK) except Kasmir territory under Indian control. The main objectives of the research are; (1) to understand the relation of O. ferruginea with reference to bioclimatic layers, digital elevation model (DEM), slope, and aspect; (2) to predict the current potential distribution of O. ferruginea in Pakistan by incorporating recent bioclimatic and topographic data; and (3) to project the distribution of O. ferruginea in Pakistan by incorporating Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) climate change hypothetical projections (future bioclimatics).

2. Materials and Methods

Figure 1 shows the flow of methods which were adopted to predict the distribution of the O. ferruginea.

2.1. Data Collection

Species sighting data with longitude, latitude, and elevation were gathered by field surveys using quadrates of 10 × 10 m of Murree, Islamabad, Mansehra, Kohistan, Swat, Lower Dir, Bajur Agency, Malakand PA, Sibi, and D.I Khan (major districts where O. ferruginea can grow) as well as extracted from the literature [3,10]. Field survey was conducted while recording GPS points of O. ferruginea sightings. Before conducting the survey, literature was studied regarding Olea growing regions in Pakistan [4,10,33,34,35]. These geographical coordinates were helpful in locating the areas of O. ferruginea distribution. With the help of ArcGIS 10.2 (Esri, Redlands, CA, USA), the sighting point map was developed. A total of 219 sighting points were used for Maxent modelling, and are shown in Figure 2.
Three types of variables were used in this study, including topographical variables (DEM, slope, and aspect) and current and future bioclimatic variables. Literature review showed that a broad range of ecological inputs (environmental layers) can be used in predicting the potential distribution of Olea ferruginea by using habitat modelling, which in this case was Maxent [24,36]. DEM layer was downloaded from the SRTM web site [37]. Slope and aspect from the DEM data were derived by using “spatial analysis” tools of ArcGIS desktop and projected to WGS 1984 UTM zone 42 North [38,39]. Current and future (2050) bioclimatic variables for the study area were downloaded from the Worldclim website for the current conditions with a resolution of 1 km. Climate change can be predicted with fair degree of confidence in Pakistan up to the year of 2050 [40,41,42,43]. Bioclimatic layers were prepared by incorporating the past trends of temperature and precipitation. These are important to estimate the difference of current and the future patterns of climate and hence the species distribution. Future climatic projections were calculated using statistics by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 4th assessment data.

2.2. Data Processing

DEM, slope, and aspect were aggregated to 1 × 1 km pixel size to harmonize the dataset with bioclim datasets [39]. In Figure 1 the data processing method can be clearly seen. DEM and derived variables (slope and aspect) were used in the model because altitude is not going to change in the near future. After aggregating, all layers were converted to ASCII format by using model builder function of ArcGIS (extract by mask and raster to ASCII conversion tools were used). By using the SDM tool for ArcGIS the Pearson correlation was calculated. The Maxent model was also run using all variables to find out the most contributing variables for current predictions with an option of 10 replicates. The variables that have no impact on O. ferruginea prediction—based on current variables in the Maxent model—were ignored and the remaining variables were used for Maxent modelling [40]. Discriminant analysis was performed in Excel. Out of highly correlated (R > ±0.8) variables, one variable each was eliminated (Figure 3 and Table A1). Bio12 (annual precipitation), bio19 (precipitation of coldest quarter), bio17 (precipitation of driest quarter), bio11 (mean temperature of coldest quarter), bio18 (precipitation of warmest quarter), bio2 (mean diurnal range), bio14 (precipitation of driest month), DEM, bio7 (temperature annual range), bio4 (temperature seasonality), and aspect were used for further processing with the Maxent model, while other variables were ignored.
Maxent is a machine learning method. It works on the principle of maximum entropy defined as “how much choice is involved in the selection of an event” [40,42]. Maxent works efficiently with a low level of presence background data for animal or plant species, for prediction, as well as for projection of suitable habitat [24,44]. Maxent estimates the distribution of the species based on presence background data and imposes the restriction that the value of each expected variable should match its empirical average under this estimated algorithm [7,30]. For the current study, Maxent 3.3.3k version was used [45]. In settings, the random seed option was selected with a 10% of test sample size and 5000 iterations. Jacknife tests and the area under curve (AUC) with training and test data were also calculated in Maxent for evaluating the accuracy of the models. After running the model for predicting the current suitable habitat with selected input variables, prediction was projected for the future (2050) as well. For future predictions, ‘fade-by-clamping’ option was kept on so that over-prediction would be reduced [7,46]. For development of the species distribution map, ASCII outputs were converted to the raster and reclassified for area calculation.

3. Results and Discussions

The results are presented in three steps. First, the relative percentage contribution of predictor variables is given, followed by model performance evaluation on the bases of AUC values, and finally current and future hypothetical habitat suitability maps are presented and compared.
The Jackknife tests from Maxent show the relative contribution of each predictor variable for O. ferruginea prediction (Figure 3). The main variables for predicting potential distribution of O. ferruginea in Pakistan are annual precipitation (bio12) and precipitation of coldest quarter (bio19) for the current scenario with respective contributions of 38.6% and 20.5% (Table A1). Therefore, bio12, bio19, bio17 (precipitation of driest quarter), and bio11 (mean temperature of coldest quarter) have a greater contribution compared to other variables for the potential distribution of O. ferruginea. Bio18 (precipitation of warmest quarter) and bio11 (mean temperature of coldest quarter) are more important for permutation (Figure 3a). Figure 3b also shows that variables with high contribution factor have a higher AUC value. Aspect has low AUC value with less contribution, thus this is not important parameter for Olea distribution.
By applying the maximum entropy principle of Maxent, the maximum possible areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) test is 0.988 for current prediction and future projection [46,47]. The calculated AUC value shows that the results are significant (above 0.9) (Figure A1).
The model provides the species’ future distribution under hypothetical projected climatic values for 2050, compared to the climatic values under which the species currently occurs. The results calculated from present bioclimatics for the current prediction show that the total suitable area for O. ferruginea is approximately 41,449 km2, which is 4.83% of the total study area. In the future bioclimatic projection scenario (hypothetical), total distributional area of O. ferruginea is 19,192 km2, which is 2.23% of the total study area, as shown in Figure 4 (and Table 1). Species distribution maps were developed by using Maxent results. The map is categorized into four classes which are highly suitable (greater than 0.6 threshold value), moderately suitable (0.4 to 0.6), less suitable (0.2–0.4), and not suitable (<0.2) (Figure 4). For current and future classified maps, the threshold values are kept constant.
Figure 4c–f shows the zoom parts of the study area where major changes in the distribution were observed during current prediction and future projection.
Maxent results for current suitable habitats for O. ferruginea are predicted to be in northern Punjab (some parts of Khushab, Chakwal, Attock, and Rawalpindi) with low threshold value, in eastern to central and northwestern part of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) (Lower Dir, Swat, Kohistan, Karak, and D.I. Khan) with low to high threshold value, in northeastern parts of Baluchistan (Ziarat, Harnai, Mastung, and Kalat) and FATA (northwestern parts of Kurram Agency and western parts of Waziristan agency), AJK (Muzaffraabad, Hattian, Haveli, Bagh, Poonch, Kotli, and Sudhnoti) and in Islamabad (Figure 4c,e). The future projected species distribution map reveals that there is a significant decrease in the overall distribution of O. ferruginea, as can be seen from the calculated area (Table 1). Averaged future predictions from bioclimatic Maxent model of 2050 has shown a decrease in suitable habitat of Olea in Kurram Agency, central Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, northern Punjab, AJK, and Islamabad, and an increase in suitable habitat in northern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Figure 4d,f). So with future bioclimatics there will be a total decrease with a shift in Olea habitat toward higher latitude and altitude (Figure 4) [46,47,48].
Distributional maps are important sources for planning conservation strategy. Ground realities also indicate the area which is predicted by Maxent to be suitable for growth of O. ferruginea. The cutting of this species should be minimized because habitat fragmentation is the first step in degradation of any species.

4. Conclusions

This study presents occurrence data for the present and a model projection to a hypothetical future climatic scenario. Furthermore, future hypothetical projections of species response to environmental changes are difficult to ascertain. Therefore, there is a need to adopt proactive conservation planning measures using forecasts of species responses with respect to change in future environment.
Maxent software was used to predict the current and future potential distribution and habitat of Olea ferruginea in different climatic scenarios. The results reveal that under upcoming bioclimatic scenarios, there will be a moderate to high impact on the O. ferruginea distribution in Pakistan. There is a significant decrease in the overall distribution of O. ferruginea. It was also observed that in some areas O. ferruginea lost habitat in its present distribution range but shifted towards higher altitude and latitude in the future climate change scenario. It is recommended that the areas predicted suitable for the O. ferruginea with both current and hypothetical future scenarios be used for plantation of this species and the deforested land can be restored.

Author Contributions

Hassan Ali and Irfan Ashraf conceived and designed the experiments; Zafeer Saqib and Irfan Ashraf conducted the survey; Uzma Ashraf, Adila Batool, performed the experiments; Muhammad Nawaz Chaudry, Hassan Ali and Uzma Ashraf analyzed the data; Uzma Ashraf wrote the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix

Sustainability 08 00722 g005 1024
Figure A1. (a) Average omissions and prediction Area; (b) Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve by using Current bioclimatics for O. ferruginea prediction.
Figure A1. (a) Average omissions and prediction Area; (b) Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve by using Current bioclimatics for O. ferruginea prediction.
Sustainability 08 00722 g005
Table
Table A1. Percentage contribution comparison of used variable.
Table A1. Percentage contribution comparison of used variable.
VariablePercent ContributionPermutation Importance
bio1238.64
bio1920.521.2
bio1712.30.1
bio11819.3
bio186.139.1
bio24.10.2
bio143.26.6
dem222.82.5
bio72.54.4
bio41.32.2
asp230.50.4

References

  1. Zohary, D.; Spiegel-Roy, P. Beginning of fruit growing in the Old World. Science 1975, 187, 319–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Paudel, S. Current Status of Wild Olive (Olea cuspidata Wall.ex G. Don) in Bajura District of Nepal. Bachelor’s Thesis, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Nepal, December 2001. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ahmed, M.; Khan, N.; Wahab, M.; Hamza, S.; Siddiqui, M.F.; Nazim, K.; Khan, M.U. Vegetation structure of olea ferruginea Royle forest of Lower Dir District of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot. 2009, 41, 2683–2695. [Google Scholar]
  4. Khan, N.; Ahmed, M.; Wahab, M.; Ajaib, M.; Hussain, S.S. Studies along an altitudinal Gradient in Monotheca Buxifolia (Faloc.) A.D, Forest, District Lower Dir, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot. 2010, 42, 3029–3038. [Google Scholar]
  5. Lennon, J.J.; Greenwood, J.J.B.; Turner, J.R.G. Bird Diversity and environmental gradients in Britian: A test of the species-energy hypothesis. J. Anim. Ecol. 2000, 69, 581–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Barbosa, A.M.; Real, R.; Olivero, J.; Vargas, J.M. Otter (Lutra lutra) distribution modelling at two resolution scales suited to conservation planning in the Iberian Peninsula. Biol. Conserv. 2003, 114, 377–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. 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]
  8. Jeschke, J.; Strayer, D. Usefulness of bioclimatic models for studying climate change and invasive species. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2008, 1134, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Trisurat, Y.; Shrestha, R.P.; Kjelgren, R. Plant species vulnerability to climate change in Peninsular Thailand. Appl. Geogr. 2011, 31, 1106–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Khan, N. A community analysis of Quercus baloot Griff, forest District Dir, Upper Pakistan. Afr. J. Plant Sci. 2012, 6, 21–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ellis, C.J. Ancient woodland indicators signal the climate change risk for dispersal-limited species. Ecol. Indicat. 2015, 53, 106–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Slee, B.; Feliciano, D. Challenges in the design of indicators for assessing the impact of the Scotland Rural Development Programme 2007–2013 on climate change mitigation. Ecol. Indic. 2015, 59, 94–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Joly, P.; Morand, C.; Cohas, A. Habitat fragmentation and amphibian conservation: Building a tool for assessing landscape matrix connectivity. Comptes Rendus Biol. 2004, 4, 500–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Negga, H. Predictive modelling of amphibian distribution using ecological survey data: A case study of central Portuga. Master’s Thesis, International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation, Enschede, The Netherlands, March 2007. [Google Scholar]
  15. Carpenter, G.; Gillson, A.N.; Winter, J. DOMAIN: A flexible modeling procedure for mapping potential distributions of plants and animals. Biodivers. Conserv. 1993, 2, 667–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Stockwell, D.R.B.; Peters, D.P. The GARP modelling system: Problems and solutions to automated spatial prediction. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Syst. 1999, 13, 143–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hirzel, A.H.; Hausser, J.; Chessel, D.; Perrin, N. Ecological-niche factor analysis: How to compute habitat-suitability map without absence data. Ecology 2002, 83, 2027–2036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Pearson, R.G.; Dawson, T.P.; Berry, P.M.; Harrison, P.A. Species: A spatial evaluation of climate impact on the envelope of species. Ecol. Model. 2002, 154, 289–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Thuiller, W. Biomod—Optimizing predictions of species distributions and projecting potential future shifts under global change. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2003, 9, 1353–1362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Elith, J.; Leathwick, J.R. Predicting species’ distributions from museum and herbarium records using multiresponse models fitted with multivariate adaptive regression splines. Divers. Distrib. 2007, 13, 165–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Franklin, J.; Davis, F.W.; Ikegami, M.; Syphard, A.D.; Flint, L.E.; Flint, A.L.; Hannah, L. Modeling plant species distributions under future climates: How fine scale do climate projections need to be? Glob. Chang. Biol. 2013, 19, 473–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Yu, J.; Wang, C.; Wan, J.; Han, S.; Wang, Q.; Nie, S. A model-based method to evaluate the ability of nature reserves to protect endangered tree species in the context of climate change. For. Ecol. Manag. 2014, 327, 48–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Moreno-Amat, E.; Mateo, R.G.; Nieto-Lugilde, D.; Morueta-Holme, N.; Svenning, J.C.; García-Amorena, I. Impact of model complexity on cross-temporal transferability in Maxent species distribution models: An assessment using paleobotanical data. Ecol. Model. 2015, 312, 308–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Pearson, R. Species Distribution Modeling for Conservation Educators and Practitioners. Available online: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.174.8844&rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=54 (accessed on 25 June 2016).
  25. Sillero, N. What does ecological modelling model? A proposed classification of ecological niche models based on their underlying methods. Ecol. Model. 2011, 222, 1343–1346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Warren, D.L. In defense of ‘niche modeling’. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2012, 27, 497–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Guisan, A.; Thuiller, W. Predicting the species distribution: Offering more than simple habitat models. Ecol. Lett. 2005, 8, 993–1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Yost, A.N.; Petersen, S.L.; Gregg, M.; Miller, R. Predictive modeling and mapping sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) nesting habitat using Maximum Entropy and a long-term dataset from Southern Oregon. Ecol. Inform. 2008, 3, 375–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Yuan, H.-S.; Wei, Y.-L.; Wang, X.-G. Maxent modeling for predicting the potential distribution of Sanghuang, an important group of medicinal fungi in China Fungal. Ecology 2015, 17, 140–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cardona, J.N.; Loyola, R.D. Applying niche-based models to predict endangered-hylid potetial dsitributions: Are neotropical protected areas effective enough? Trop. Convers. Sci. 2008, 1, 417–445. [Google Scholar]
  31. Kgosiesele, E. Predictive Distribution Modelling of Timon lepida in Spain. Master’s Thesis, ITC, Enschede, The Netherlands, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  32. Yang, X.Q.; Kushwaha, S.P.S.; Saran, S.; Xu, J.; Roy, P.S. Maxent modeling for predicting the potential distribution of medicinal plant, Justicia adhatoda L. in Lesser Himalayan foothills. Ecol. Eng. 2013, 51, 83–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Khan, A.U.; Ahmad, F.; Sharif, F. Rapid Ranking Method for Prioritizing Restoration by Evaluating Human Influences on the Status of Scrub Forest: A Case Study. Pak. J. Bot. 2013, 45, 11–16. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ahmad, G. Mapping a Dry Shrub Forest for Biodiversity. Available online: https://www.itc.nl/library/Papers/msc_2001/Ghayyas_Ahmed.pdf (accessed on 28 July 2016).
  35. Sharma, R.K.; Sharma, N.; Samant, S.S.; Nandi, S.K.; Palni, L.M.S. Antioxidant Activities in Methanolic Extracts of Olea Ferruginea Royle Fruits. Int. J. Biosci. Biochem. Bioinform. 2013, 3, 154–156. [Google Scholar]
  36. Kumar, S.; Stohlgren, T.J. Maxent modeling for predicting suitable habitat for threatened and endangered tree Canacomyrica monticola in New Caledonia. J. Ecol. Nat. Environ. 2009, 1, 094–098. [Google Scholar]
  37. SRTM 90m Digital Elevation Database v4.1. Available online: http://www.cgiar-csi.org/data/srtm-90m-digital-elevation-database-v4-1 (accessed on 28 July 2016).
  38. Kaba, E.; Ginzler, O.; Ogilvie, J.; Pinner, L.; Patterson, D. ArcGIS Destop Help 9.2—Determining Aspect. 2007. Available online: http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.2/index.cfm?TopicName=Calculating_slope (accessed on 21 June 2013).
  39. Leyequien, E.; Verrelst, J.; Slot, M.; Schaepman-Strub, G.; Heitkonig, I.; Skidmore, A.K. Applying remote sensing to terrestrial animal distribution and diversity. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinfomation 2007, 9, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Khanum, R.; Mumtaz, A.S.; Kumar, S. Prediciting impact of climate change on medicinal asclepiads of Pakistan using Maxent modeling. Acta Oecol. 2013, 49, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. WorldClim. Available online: www.worldclim.org (accessed on 28 July 2016).
  42. Shannon, C. A Mathematical Theory of Communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1948, 27, 379–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Marquina, A. (Ed.) Environmental Challenges in the Mediterranean 2000–2050: Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Environmental Challenges in the Mediterranean 2000–2050 Madrid, Spain 2–5 October 2002; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 2004; Volume 37.
  44. Papes, M.G. Modelling ecological niches from low numbers of occurrences: Assessment of the conservation status of poorly known viverrids (Mammalia, Carnivora) across two continents. Divers. Distrib. 2007, 13, 890–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Maxent Software for Species Habitat Modeling. Most Current Version: 3.3.3k. Available online: http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~schapire/maxent/ (accessed on 28 July 2016).
  46. Fielding, A.H.; Bell, J.F.L. A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ. Conserv. 1997, 24, 38–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Van der Putten, W.H.; Macel, M.; Visser, M.E. Predicting species distribution and abundance responses to climate change: Why it is essential to include biotic interactions across trophic levels. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B. Biol. Sci. 2010, 365, 2025–2034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Chen, I.C.; Hill, J.K.; Ohlemüller, R.; Roy, D.B.; Thomas, C.D. Rapid range shifts of species associated with high levels of climate warming. Science 2011, 333, 1024–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sustainability 08 00722 g001 1024
Figure 1. Processing methodology in flow diagram.
Figure 1. Processing methodology in flow diagram.
Sustainability 08 00722 g001
Sustainability 08 00722 g002 1024
Figure 2. Current distribution of O. ferruginea trees in Pakistan.
Figure 2. Current distribution of O. ferruginea trees in Pakistan.
Sustainability 08 00722 g002
Sustainability 08 00722 g003a 1024Sustainability 08 00722 g003b 1024
Figure 3. Jackknife of regularized training gain (a) and area under curve (AUC) (b) for O. ferruginea.
Figure 3. Jackknife of regularized training gain (a) and area under curve (AUC) (b) for O. ferruginea.
Sustainability 08 00722 g003aSustainability 08 00722 g003b
Sustainability 08 00722 g004a 1024Sustainability 08 00722 g004b 1024
Figure 4. (a,b) Comparison of the classified output of the O. feruginea by using the current prediction (a) and future projection (b); (c,d) Zoom Part of northern Pakistan where changes are observed in the O. ferruginea distribution; (e,f) Zoom Part of north western area of Pakistan where changes are observed in the O. ferruginea distribution.
Figure 4. (a,b) Comparison of the classified output of the O. feruginea by using the current prediction (a) and future projection (b); (c,d) Zoom Part of northern Pakistan where changes are observed in the O. ferruginea distribution; (e,f) Zoom Part of north western area of Pakistan where changes are observed in the O. ferruginea distribution.
Sustainability 08 00722 g004aSustainability 08 00722 g004b
Table
Table 1. Comparison showing current and future distributional area of O. ferruginea.
Table 1. Comparison showing current and future distributional area of O. ferruginea.
SuitabilityThresholdCurrent Prediction (Km2)Current Prediction (%)Future Projection (Km2)Future Projection (%)
Unsuitable area<0.281616995.1683842697.76
Less suitable area0.2–0.4351854.10110981.29
Moderately Suitable area0.4–0.649720.5743610.50
Highly Suitable area>0.612920.1537330.43
Total Suitable area0.2–1.0414494.83191922.23

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ashraf, U.; Ali, H.; Chaudry, M.N.; Ashraf, I.; Batool, A.; Saqib, Z. Predicting the Potential Distribution of Olea ferruginea in Pakistan incorporating Climate Change by Using Maxent Model. Sustainability 2016, 8, 722. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080722

AMA Style

Ashraf U, Ali H, Chaudry MN, Ashraf I, Batool A, Saqib Z. Predicting the Potential Distribution of Olea ferruginea in Pakistan incorporating Climate Change by Using Maxent Model. Sustainability. 2016; 8(8):722. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080722

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ashraf, Uzma, Hassan Ali, Muhammad Nawaz Chaudry, Irfan Ashraf, Adila Batool, and Zafeer Saqib. 2016. "Predicting the Potential Distribution of Olea ferruginea in Pakistan incorporating Climate Change by Using Maxent Model" Sustainability 8, no. 8: 722. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080722

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