
doi: 10.1002/eap.2465
pmid: 34614252
AbstractStudies predicting how the distribution of aquatic organisms will shift with climate change often use projected increases in air temperature or water temperature. However, the assumed correlations between water temperature change and air temperature change can be problematic, especially for mountainous, high elevation streams. Using stream fish assemblage data from 1,442 surveys across a mountain–plains gradient (Wyoming, USA; 1990–2018), we compared the responsiveness of thermal guilds, native status groups, and assemblage structure to projected climate warming from generalized air temperature models and stream‐specific water temperature models. Air temperature models consistently predicted greater range shift differences between warm‐water and cold‐water species, with air temperatures predicting greater increases in occurrence and greater range expansions for warm‐water species. The “over‐prediction” of warm‐water species expansions resulted in air temperature models predicting higher rates of novel species combinations, greater increases in local species richness, and higher magnitudes of biotic homogenization compared with water temperature models. Despite differences in model predictions for warm‐water species, both air and water temperature models predicted that three cold‐water species would exhibit similar decreases in occurrence (decline of 1.0% and 1.8% of sites per 1°C warming, respectively) and similar range contractions (16.6 and 21.5 m elevation loss per 1°C warming, respectively). The “over‐prediction” for warm‐water species is partially attributable to water temperatures warming at slower rates than air temperatures because local, stream‐scale factors (e.g., riparian cover, groundwater inputs) buffer high elevation streams from rising air temperatures. Our study provides the first comparison of how inferences about climate‐induced biotic change at the species‐ and assemblage‐levels differ when modeling with generalized air temperatures versus stream‐specific water temperatures. We recommend that future studies use stream‐specific water temperature models, especially for mountainous, high elevation streams, to avoid the “over‐prediction” of biotic changes observed from air temperature variables.
Rivers, Climate Change, Fishes, Temperature, Animals, Water
Rivers, Climate Change, Fishes, Temperature, Animals, Water
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 26 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
