Environmental ranges estimated from species distribution models are not good predictors of lizard and frog physiological tolerances

  • Andrea PazEmail author
  • Carlos E. Guarnizo
Original Paper


Using species ranges, in particular those derived from species distribution models (SDM), to obtain characteristics of the species’ niche such as temperature tolerances is tempting. Over the past decade the literature has seen the increase in the use of SDMs based on locality data and spatially explicit datasets (climate, vegetation etc.). Furthermore, several studies have explored climatic niche evolution and niche conservatism using temperature and precipitation extracted from the resulting models in a phylogenetic context. However, species´ fundamental niches (set of abiotic conditions in which a species can live) are often incompletely characterized in SDMs, reconstructed mainly based on spotty locality data (about species presence and rarely including absence data). Indeed, a species´ realized niche, the actually occupied conditions where a species live, may be a subset of their fundamental niche due to lack of habitat availability, constraints on dispersion, and biotic interactions. Here, we produced SDMs for 50 species of neotropical reptiles and amphibians and compared extreme temperature estimates extracted from the modelled area (model-inferred) with thermo-physiological estimates of critical temperatures (physiology-inferred). When comparing experimental critical thermal maximum and minimums with temperature values extracted from the estimated range, we found a general pattern of maximum temperatures experienced that are cooler than the species maximum tolerances, and minimum temperatures close to or even colder than their minimum tolerances. Characterizing niche traits from SDMs is dangerous because SDMs are not representing the fundamental niche of species as measured with thermal physiology limits and they are also not deviating from the fundamental niche in a predictable way.


Species distribution models Thermal limits CTmin CTmax 



The authors would like to thank Melissa Hernández for invaluable help compiling locality and physiological information from the literature. We would also like to thank Jamie Kass, the Evolvert, and @CrawLab at Universidad de los Andes in Bogota, Colombia and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and suggestions that greatly improved this manuscript. Finally, the @CrawLab for discussions leading to this project Work by AP is co-funded by a Fulbright-Colciencias fellowship and FAPESP (BIOTA, 2013/50297-0), NSF (DEB 1343578), and NASA, through the Dimensions of Biodiversity Program.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

10682_2019_10022_MOESM1_ESM.docx (15 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 15 kb)
10682_2019_10022_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (78 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (XLSX 77 kb)
10682_2019_10022_MOESM3_ESM.docx (1.4 mb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 1388 kb)


  1. Addo-Bediako A, Chown SL, Gaston KJ (2000) Thermal tolerance, climatic variability and latitude. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:739–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmadzadeh F, Flecks M, Carretero MA et al (2016) Separate histories in both sides of the Mediterranean: phylogeny and niche evolution of ocellated lizards. J Biogeogr 43:1242–1253. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Almendra AL, González-Cózatl FX, Engstrom MD, Rogers DS (2018) Molecular phylogenetics and evolution evolutionary relationships and climatic niche evolution in the genus Handleyomys (Sigmodontinae: Oryzomyini). Mol Phylogenet Evol 128:12–25. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Angilletta MJ, Niewiarowski PH, Navas CA (2002) The evolution of thermal physiology in ectotherms. J Therm Biol 27:249–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Araújo MB, Ferri-Yáñez F, Bozinovic F et al (2013) Heat freezes niche evolution. Ecol Lett 16:1206–1219. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Ashby B, Watkins E, Lourenço J et al (2017) Competing species leave many potential niches unfilled. Nat Ecol Evol 1:1495–1501. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Bennett JM, Calosi P, Clusella-Trullas S, Martínez B et al (2018) GlobTherm, a global database on thermal tolerances for aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Sci Data 5:180022. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Camacho A, Rusch TW (2017) Methods and pitfalls of measuring thermal preference and tolerance in lizards. J Therm Biol. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Castro-Insua A, Gómez-Rodríguez C, Wiens JJ, Baselga A (2018) Climatic niche divergence drives patterns of diversification and richness among mammal families. Sci Rep 8:8781. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Constable H, Guralnick R, Wieczorek J et al (2010) VertNet: a new model for biodiversity data sharing. PLoS Biol 8:1–4. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cunningham HR, Rissler LJ, Buckley LB, Urban MC (2015) Abiotic and biotic constraints across reptile and amphibian ranges. Ecography 38:1–8. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Darwin C (1882) On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. John Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. De Frenne P, Rodriguez-Sanchez F, Coomes DA et al (2013) Microclimate moderates plant responses to macroclimate warming. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:18561–18565. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Felsenstein J (1985) Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am Nat 125:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fick SE, Hijmans RJ (2017) WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 37:4302–4315. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fisher-Reid MC, Kozak KH, Wiens JJ (2012) How is the rate of climatic-niche evolution related to climatic-niche breadth? Evolution (N Y) 66:3836–3851. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. GBIF: The Global Biodiversity Information Facility (2019) What is GBIF?. Available from
  18. Ghalambor CK, Huey RB, Martin PR et al (2006) Are mountain passes higher in the tropics? Janzen’s hypothesis revisited. Integr Comp Biol 46:5–17. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gillingham PK, Palmer SCF, Huntley B et al (2012) The relative importance of climate and habitat in determining the distributions of species at different spatial scales: a case study with ground beetles in Great Britain. Ecography 35:831–838. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gouveia SF, Hortal J, Tejedo M et al (2014) Climatic niche at physiological and macroecological scales: the thermal tolerance-geographical range interface and niche dimensionality. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 23:446–456. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Graham CH, Ron SR, Santos JC et al (2004) Integrating phylogenetics and environmental niche models to explore speciation mechanisms in dendrobatid frogs. Evolution (N Y) 58:1781–1793Google Scholar
  22. Gunderson AR, Stillman JH (2015) Plasticity in thermal tolerance has limited potential to buffer ectotherms from global warming. Proc R Soc B 282:201550401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gvoždík L (2018) Just what is the thermal niche? Oikos 127:1701–1710. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hijmans RJ, Cameron SE, Parra JL et al (2005) Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 25:1965–1978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hijmans R, Phillips S, Leathwick J, Elith J (2017) Package ‘dismo’: Species distribution modeling. Version 1.1.4.
  26. Hutchinson GE (1957) Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol 22:415–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. IUCN (2019) IUCN red list of threatened species. Version 2018.2.
  28. Janzen DH (1967) Why mountain passes are higher in the tropics. Am Nat 101:233. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jiménez L, Soberón J, Christen JA, Soto D (2019) On the problem of modeling a fundamental niche from occurrence data. Ecol Model 397:74–83. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kearney MR, Porter WP (2017) NicheMapR—an R package for biophysical modelling: the microclimate model. Ecography 40:664–674. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kearney MR, Isaac AP, Porter WP (2014) microclim: global estimates of hourly microclimate based on long-term monthly climate averages. Sci Data 1:1–9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Louthan AM, Doak DF, Angert AL (2006) Where and when do species interactions set range limits? Trends Ecol Evol 30:780–792. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Muscarella R, Galante PJ, Soley-Guardia M et al (2014) ENMeval: an R package for conducting spatially independent evaluations and estimating optimal model complexity for Maxent ecological niche models. Methods Ecol Evol 5:1198–1205. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pearson RG, Raxworthy CJ, Nakamura M, Peterson AT (2007) Predicting species distributions from small numbers of occurrence records: a test case using cryptic geckos in Madagascar. J Biogeogr 34:102–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Peterson AT, Soberón J, Pearson RG et al (2011) Ecological niches and geographic distributions. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pulliam HR (2000) On the relationship between niche and distribution. Ecol Lett 3:349–361. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Radosavljevic A, Anderson RP (2014) Making better Maxent models of species distributions: complexity, overfitting and evaluation. J Biogeogr 41:629–643. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Saupe E, Barve N, Owens H et al (2018) Reconstructing ecological niche evolution when niches are incompletely characterized. Syst Biol 67:428–438. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Phillips SJ, Dudik M, Schapire RE, et al. (2004) A maximum entropy approach to species distribution modeling. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Machine Learning, pp 655–662Google Scholar
  40. Schemske DW, Mittelbach GG, Cornell HV et al (2009) Is there a latitudinal gradient in the importance of biotic interactions? Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:245–269. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Soberón J (2007) Grinnellian and Eltonian niches and geographic distributions of species. Ecol Lett 10:1115–1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sunday JM, Bates AE, Dulvy NK (2012) Thermal tolerance and the global redistribution of animals. Nat Clim Change 2:686–690. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Terblanche JS, Deere JA, Clusella-Trullas S et al (2007) Critical thermal limits depend on methodological context. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 274:2935–2942. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Williams JW, Jackson ST, Kutzbach JE (2007) Projected distributions of novel and disappearing climates by 2100 AD. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:5738–5742CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biology Program, The Graduate CenterCity University of New YorkNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Biology DepartmentCity College of New YorkNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Departamento de Ciencias BiológicasUniversidad de los AndesBogotáColombia

Personalised recommendations