Next Article in Journal
The Impact of Bamboo (Phyllostachys edulis) Expansion on the Water Use Patterns of Broadleaf Trees
Previous Article in Journal
Global Spatial Projections of Forest Soil Respiration and Associated Uncertainties
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 15
Issue 11
10.3390/f15111983
forests-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

The Future Migration Direction of Deer and Japanese Yew Is Consistent Under Climate Change

by
Xianzhe Wang
†,
Jianan Feng
†,
Yang Hong
,
Hairong Du
,
Minghai Zhang
* and
Weiqi Zhang
*
College of Wildlife and Protected Area, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Forests 2024, 15(11), 1983; https://doi.org/10.3390/f15111983
Submission received: 17 September 2024 / Revised: 25 October 2024 / Accepted: 30 October 2024 / Published: 10 November 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Forest Biodiversity)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Climate change is becoming an important driver of biodiversity loss by altering the habitat, distribution and interspecific relationships of species. Japanese yew (Taxus cuspidata) is a first class protected plant in China, which has important ecological significance and occupies a certain position in the feeding habit of wapiti (Cervus elaphus) and Siberian roe deer (Capreolus pygargus). Due to human and animal damage, the number of Japanese yew has gradually decreased. Therefore, understanding the potential distribution of Japanese yew and the suitable areas for deer to browse on it under climate change will help to further protect these three species in Northeast China, especially migrate to more suitable areas in different scenarios in the future. From July 2021 to July 2024, we collected the information of species distribution and the variables associated with the species’ ecological limits in Muling National Nature Reserve to cross-reflect the current and future distribution and feeding area of the two species to assess each other’s impacts with Maximum entropy model (MaxEnt). The results showed that under the SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios, feeding pressure, driest quarter precipitation (BIO17) and seasonal temperature variation coefficient (BIO4) were the main variables affecting the distribution of Japanese yew, and the driest quarter precipitation (BIO17) and annual precipitation (BIO12) were the main variables affecting wapiti and Siberian roe deer foraging them. Under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios, the suitable area of Japanese yew and the feeding area of the two species of deer gradually decreased from 2041 to 2100. Compared with wapiti, Siberian roe deer has a greater impact on the distribution range of Japanese yew, and the suitable feeding area is wider. It is expected that the potential centroid of Japanese yew, wapiti and Siberian roe deer will migrate to higher latitudes in the future. These findings provide a scientific basis for the reserve to develop relevant measures and plans and effectively protect the three species.

1. Introduction

The change of species geographical distribution caused by climate change is one of the main reasons for biodiversity decline and even species extinction [1,2]. Global climate change, especially the environmental changes caused by the climate oscillation since the Quaternary period, have profoundly affected the modern distribution and genetic structure of many plants and animals in the temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere [3]. In recent decades and in the future, the climate showed a trend of rising temperature [4]. Climate change will directly or indirectly affect the original spatial distribution pattern of species and related ecological factors, thereby changing the distribution area, range and quantity, because terrestrial ecosystems are highly sensitive to temperature changes brought about by such changes, which may aggravate the degree of habitat fragmentation of mountain species [5,6,7].
Climate change causes species to withdraw from existing habitats or create new suitable habitats [8]. In other words, species can adapt to climate change through adaptive evolution and changes in distribution [9]. In recent decades, the global climate has changed rapidly due to human activities, and there is evidence that this change will continue throughout the 21st century [10]. Climate change has widely affected biological groups, resulting in changes in the distribution of animals and plants, and even extinction. Many reports have pointed out that climate change will force animals to migrate to high-altitude and high-latitude regions, resulting in habitat loss, fragmentation and distribution retreat [11,12,13]. Lenarz et al. [14] and Perez-Giron, J. C. et al. [15] studies have proved this point.
Species distribution models (SDMs) are important tools to predict the potential geographical distribution of species in the natural environment based on species distribution records and related environmental factors [16,17]. Maximum entropy model (MaxEnt) is commonly used which has the advantages of small sample requirements, short running time and high prediction accuracy [18,19], by optimizing its expansion and comprehensive evaluation can improve the efficiency and accuracy of predicting species distribution [19]. For example, Elith, J. et al. studied statistical explanation of MaxEnt and ecological explanation and prediction across space and time [20,21].
Japanese yew (Taxus cuspidata) is a Tertiary relict plant [22]. It is native to northeast China, Japan, South Korea and the Russian Far East. Its habitat has been seriously affected by human disturbance and feeding by deer for a long time, and it also faces the stress of climate change. However, climate change is the primary factor restricting the geographical distribution of taxus chinensis in northeast China [23], which makes its survival precarious and brings great difficulties and challenges to the conservation work [24,25]. Wapiti (Cervus elaphus) and Siberian roe deer (Capreolus pygargus) are the main prey of the Amur tiger (Panthera tigris) and Amur leopard (Panthera pardus orientalis). Previous studies have found that both of them forage Japanese yew [26], which severely damaged its young trees [27], and the number of them in northeast China declined sharply [28,29]. There have been some studies on the potential distribution of wild endangered plants predicted by climate change, but these only made detailed predictions on the potential distribution of specific species, and few feasible schemes involved in priority conservation area planning [30]. Moreover, there is little research on how Japanese yew will adapt to climate and distribution changes in the southern forest area of Laoye Mountain in the future, and what kind of environment is suitable for wapiti and Siberian roe deer to eat Japanese yew. Based on the above findings, in order to explore the relationship between the potential geographic distribution of Japanese yew and the suitable feeding area of them for wapiti and Siberian roe deer under future climate change conditions, this study took Muling National Nature Reserve as the research object, collected relevant sites and environmental variables, and used MaxEnt model for evaluation. This has important implications for the conservation, population recovery and distribution expansion of these three species.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Muling National Nature Reserve is located in the Muling Forestry Bureau of Heilongjiang Province (130°00′–130°28′ E, 43°49′–44°06′ N), it is 33 km wide from east to west, 31 km long from north to south, with a total area of 356.48 km2 [31]. The area has lower mountains, with an elevation of 500–900 m, and its terrain is distributed in a belt-like manner. The climate is typical of a temperate continental climate, with an average annual temperature of about −2 °C. The frost-free period of 130 d, snow cover is about 150 d, and the average snow depth can reach 500 mm. In addition to Japanese yew, there are other rare and endangered plants such as Phello-dendron amurence, Juglans mandshurica and Pinus koraiensis. Vertebrates are mainly temperate indwelling animals, and the representative include the Amur tiger (Pnthera tigris altaica), Amur leopard (Panthera pardus orientalis), wapiti, and Siberian roe deer [27].

2.2. Collect Japanese Yew Sites and Deer Feeding Sites on Japanese Yew

Twenty infrared cameras were set up in the research area where the distribution of Japanese yew saplings and the frequent activities of deer were selected. The height of the camera from the ground is 30–90 cm, which ensures that the entire saplings can be photographed, and the feeding height of the deer can be met (Figure 1). Camera parameter setting: Photo (3 photos) + video (15 s) mode, monitoring period of 3 years. In the winter of 2021 to 2024, we selected the area with a high concentration of Japanese yew for field investigation. We distinguished feeding marks based on feeding characteristics, footstep and hoof prints, and infrared camera monitoring [26], and obtained 17 feeding sites of waipiti and 23 of Siberian roe deer by spatial autocorrelation. From July 2021 to January 2024, 136 wapiti sites, 257 Siberian roe deer sites, and 172 Japanese yew sites were obtained.

2.3. Acquisition of Variable

Based on the ecological limitations of species, we selected 12 variables to calibrate the current model including forest cover density, terrain, climate factors, and feeding pressure of deer (Table 1). We finally selected six climate factors after Pearson correlation analysis, including mean monthly temperature difference (BIO2), isotherm (BIO3), seasonal temperature variation coefficient (BIO4), annual precipitation (BIO12), precipitation in wettest quarter (BIO16) and precipitation in driest quarter (BIO17). The forest density was obtained by Landsat 8 remote sensing image interpretation and reclassification in ArcGIS 10.8 software. Using the Spatial Analyst module in ArcGIS 10.8, a 30 m resolution digital elevation model (DEM) was masked to extract terrain features such as elevation, slope, and aspect. The data of feeding pressure of wapiti and Siberian roe deer on Japanese yew were obtained through field investigation. The feed pressure grid is derived from the data accumulation in recent years, and is predicted by the feeding site and environmental data. The study area was divided into 1 km × 1 km grid, and the grid with deer eating Japanese yew (with feeding pressure) was reclassified as 1. The grid reclassification of no deer feeding on Japanese yew (no feeding pressure) was 0. It is data of type 0/1.

2.4. Climate Change Projections

Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMlP6) data were acquired from the “WorldClim Future Climate” database with a spatial resolution of about 30 arcseconds. In this study, we selected two scenarios for prediction, SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5, in the mode of McC-esm2. SSP2–4.5 is a stabilisation scenario known as the “middle of the road”, in which trends follow their historical patterns [32]; The SSP5–8.5 scenario is the most pessimistic, and often wrongly used as “business as usual”, and it was therefore considered an unlikely, high-risk future [33,34]. Both scenarios were tested between 2041–2060 and 2081–2100. Despite climate change, elevation, slope, aspect, forest density, feeding pressure of deer and distribution of Japanese yew remained unchanged for a certain period of time (Table 1). All future climate variables and environmental factors were tailored to the study regions with ArcGIS 10.8, and then projected and resamped.

2.5. Modelling Future Habitat Suitability

We use the method of systematic resampling to analyze the sites and avoid the spatial autocorrelation caused by the close distance between the sites. SPSS 19.0 was used for standardized processing of variable data and Spearman correlation analysis was performed. We used the selected sits and variables (climate, terrain, forest cover density, feeding pressure of deer) to simulate the distribution of Japanese yew under future climate change. In addition, the suitable distribution regions of Japanese yew was selected as the research, and the feeding sites of the two deer and variables (climate, terrain, forest density) were selected to predict the changes of the habitat of them feeding by the two deer in Northeast China. The cutting method and its comprehensive contribution are evaluated. 75% of the sites were used to build the model, 25% were used for validation, and the model ran for 10 cycles. The evaluation criteria are: AUC 0.5–0.6 is substandard, 0.6–0.7 is poor, 0.7–0.8 is average, 0.8–0.9 is good, and 0.9–1.0 is excellent. All procedures were performed using MaxEnt 3.3.
The above contents were reclassified by ArcGIS 10.8. The average of the maximum training sensitivity and specificity after 10 operations were used as the threshold for the distribution of suitable foraging habitats [35]. The habitats were divided into two levels: 0–0.3 were unsuitable habitats, and 0.3–1 were suitable.

2.6. Centroid Migration of Japanese Yew and Deer in the Future

Based on the current species distribution results, the future under different scenario models was modeled and predicted. Zonal Statistic of Spatial Analysis Tools in ArcGIS was used to calculate the area suitable for survival/feeding in each future period [36,37]. The SDM toolbox of python [38] was used to explore the dynamic migration trend of Japanese yew and the region where Japanese yew is eaten by deer, and the average distribution center (centroid) from the current distribution to the future distribution was calculated. The displacement of the distribution region was observed through the change of different centroid points [39], and the magnitude and direction of the change with time were analyzed.

3. Results

3.1. Currently Suitable Region for Japanese Yew

The results showed that the current suitable distribution regions of Japanese yew were 34.65 km2 and accounting for 9.72% of the total study region, and the unsuitable were 321.83 km2, accounting for 90.28%. The regions where the deer foraged Japanese yew were mainly in the western of the reserve (Figure 2).

3.2. Future Japanese Yew Habitat Suitability

Receiver Operating characteristic curve (ROC) results showed an AUC of 0.91 ± 0.03, making the prediction “good”. The results showed that the most important factor affecting the distribution of Japanese yew was the feeding pressure of wapiti and Siberian roe deer, followed by the driest season precipitation (BIO17) and the seasonal temperature variation coefficient (BIO4). It can be seen that without the threat of deer predation, rainfall in the dry season and seasonal temperature changes are crucial to the survival of Japanese yew.
Compared with the current (Figure 2), the suitable distribution area of Japanese yew decreased significantly, and the unsuitable survival area increased in the future. The loss region was mainly concentrated in the northeast and southwest and the suitable distribution from 2081 to 2100 was smaller than that from 2041 to 2060. The overall distribution region moved to the north and became more fragmented (Figure 3). The details are shown in Table 2.
The altitude suitable for Japanese yew increased from 2041 to 2100, and altitude was 650–690 m under SSP2-4.5 and 640–700 m under SSP5-8.5 (Figure 4). Therefore, it is expected that the Japanese yew is suitable for higher elevations to meet the survival needs with the passage of time.

3.3. Future Suitable for Deer to Feeding Japanese Yew Region

The AUC values of MaxEnt’s ROC curve were all greater than 0.85, that is, the model accurately predicted the habitat suitability of wapiti and Siberian roe deer to eat Japanese yew in the future in 85% of cases. Climate-related variables, especially those related to moisture, seriously affect the consumption of Japanese yew by deer. The driest quarterly precipitation (BIO17) was the most important variable, followed by annual precipitation (BIO12) and seasonal temperature variation coefficient (BIO4). Compared with SSP2-4.5 scenario, aspect in SSP5-8.5 scenario is also one of the influencing factors. Altitude also affected the habitat suitability of Siberian roe deer to eat Japanese yew to a certain extent (Table 3).
Spatiologically, the area suitable for feeding Japanese yew under SSP5-8.5 from 2041 to 2100 is larger than that under SSP2-4.5. The area suitable for Siberian roe deer is larger than that of wapiti under both scenarios. With the passage of time, the suitability of both feeding regions in the future will decrease, and the northeastern will be lost. The area suitable for wapiti to forageon Japanese yew was more reduced, and the Siberian roe deerwas more average (Figure 5). The specific is shown in Table 4.

3.4. Changes in the Area of Deer Feeding Japanese Yew in the Future

Under the scenarios SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5, the area suitable for the deer to feed Japanese yew and the region suitable for the survival of Japanese yew were superimposed. The results showed that the distribution range of Japanese yew was more strongly influenced by Siberian roe deer, that is, the extent of feeding coverage was greater than that of wapiti. In the future, the suitable feeding regions for both wapiti and Siberian roe deer will move northward, and the damage to Japanese yew is expected to be greater in the north and less so in the south (Figure 6). In short, the migration direction of the wapiti and Siberian roe deer feeding region was consistent with that of the suitable living region of Japanese yew.

3.5. Future Centroid Migration

Under two different climate models in the future, the potential distribution area of Japanese yew and the centroid of the suitable feeding area for the two species of deer showed a northward migration trend (Figure 7). The predicted results show that by the end of the 21st century, the centroids of the three species will migrate further to the northwest, but the migration amplitude is small, and they are suitable for distribution or feeding in higher latitudes. Under the SSP2-4.5, the centroids of Japanese yew, wapiti and Siberian roe deer migrated 6.18 km, 5.9 km and 3.84 km, respectively, from 2041 to 2100. Under SSP2-4.5, the centroids migrated 5.97 km, 5.95 km and 3.96 km, respectively. The migration degree of these three species was higher under the SSP5-8.5, from the largest to the smallest, Japanese yew, Siberian roe deer and wapiti.

4. Discussion

Climate factors are the dominant conditions for determining species distribution [40,41], but the feeding pressure of animals should not be ignored. For example, Jonas et al. found that Picea abies seedlings that had been fed by roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) grew slower than those that had not been fed [42]. According to the study on the diet of wapiti, Japanese yew is one of the main foods of wapiti in winter, making up 13% of its food composition [27]. Siberian roe deer also eat a certain amount of Japanese yew, causing significant damage to the growth of Japanese yew [26]. The results of this study show that the feeding pressure of deer is the most important factor affecting the future distribution of Japanese yew, so it is the main reason for the reduction of the suitable distribution area of Japanese yew in the future. This result is different from Wan et al. [43] in 2014, we assume that he only considered climate change and did not consider the animal feeding. To this end, we simulated the future distribution of Japanese yew without deer feeding as a control (Figure 8). When there was no deer feeding, the overall distribution region of Japanese yew would not change much in the future. It can be seen that the feeding factors could not be ignored.
The driest quarterly precipitation (BIO17) and annual precipitation (BIO12) were the most important environmental variables that affected wapiti and Siberian roe deer to feed Japanese yew. From 2041 to 2100, Siberian roe deer has a greater impact on the distribution range of Japanese yew, and the regions suitable for feeding are wider. The reason for this phenomenon may be that the population base of Siberian roe deer population in this reserve is larger, and the distribution range is wider [44,45], so the region suitable for feeding Japanese yew is more. By the end of the 21st century, the most suitable regions for Japanese yew will shift to higher elevations, which is consistent with the results of Yang et al. 2024 [46] and Jos’e Carlos et al. 2024 [15]. This northward migration is due to the species’ dependence on water resources and sensitivity to expected climate change [47,48]. The suitable distribution area of Japanese yew will decrease in the future, and will expand northward, which is consistent with the research results of Chen et al. 2019 [23]. Meanwhile, the region suitable for deer to feed them will also migrate and spread northward. In the future, under the effect of climate change, the distribution region of Japanese yew and the suitable feeding region of deer interact.
Revealing the interaction between species and environment is an important step of habitat suitability assessment of species [49]. The spatial distribution simulation results of MaxEnt on the feeding regions of wapiti, Siberian roe deer and the suitable of Japanese yew are mainly influenced by data and climate variables. The more data and the higher the model accuracy. Our data mainly consist of field investigation footstep tracking and camera-trapping. Due to the difference of years, some data may be affected by land use, human stress and other factors, and the actual population distribution may change, resulting in certain errors in the model prediction results. According to the results of this study, investigations at higher latitudes should be carried out in future work.

5. Conclusions

By the end of the 21st century, the main variables affecting the distribution of Japanese yew were feeding pressure of deer, driest quarter precipitation (BIO17) and seasonal temperature variation coefficient (BIO4). The main variables affecting wapiti and Siberian roe deer foraging Japanese yew were driest quarter precipitation (BIO17) and annual precipitation (BIO12). Under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios, the potential distribution of Japanese yew and wapiti and Siberian roe deer feeding them will further decrease in the future. Compared with wapiti, Siberian roe deer has a greater impact on the distribution of Japanese yew, and the region suitable for feeding Japanese yew is wider. It is expected that Japanese yew is more suitable for survival in high altitude regions, and the potential centroids of the three species will move to higher latitudes.
Under climate change, the potential distribution of Japanese yew and the suitable regions for deer to feed them will affect each other and migrate to the same direction. Based on the results of this study, it is suggested that wild Japanese yew seedlings should be protected in situ, such as setting up fences for protection, and in future work, more detailed studies should be conducted on Japanese yew in high-latitude regions to obtain more accurate distribution patterns.

Author Contributions

All the authors provided ideas; X.W. and J.F. collected data, made important contributions to the draft, and eventually approved the publication. X.W. analyzed the data and designed the method; X.W. and J.F. led the writing of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, grant number 2572023AW20; Opening Research Projects for the Think Tanks of Heilongjiang Provincial Universities, grant number ZKKF2022179; National Key Research and Development Program, grant number 2023YFF1305000; National Natural Science Foundation of China, NSFC, grant number 32071512.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Ye, W.; Yang, N.; Yang, B.; Li, Y.; Zhang, J.; Chen, D.; Zhou, C.; Zhong, X.; Zhang, J. Impacts of climate change on potential geographical distribution of golden pheasant (Chrysolophus pictus), an endemic species in China. Chin. J. Ecol. 2021, 40, 1783–1792. [Google Scholar]
  2. Yang, Z.; Han, S.; Li, Y.; Wang, J.; He, H. Impacts and assessment of climate change on the global distribution of potentially suitable habitats for Panthera uncia. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2023, 43, 1412–1425. [Google Scholar]
  3. Hewitt, G. The genetic legacy of the Quaternary ice ages. Nature 2000, 405, 907–913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Easterling, D.R.; Meehl, G.A.; Parmesan, C.; Changnon, S.A.; Karl, T.R.; Mearns, L.O. Climate extremes: Observations, modeling, and impacts. Science 2000, 289, 2068–2074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Williams, P.; Hannah, L.; Andelman, S.; Midgley, G.; Araújo, M.; Hughes, G.; Manne, L.; Martinez-Meyer, E.; Pearson, R. Planning for climate change: Identifying minimum-dispersal corridors for the Cape proteaceae. Conserv. Biol. 2005, 19, 1063–1074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Tape, K.D.; Christie, K.; Carroll, G.; O’donnell, J.A. Novel wildlife in the Arctic: The influence of changing riparian ecosystems and shrub habitat expansion on snowshoe hares. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2016, 22, 208–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Nolan, C.; Overpeck, J.T.; Allen JR, M.; Anderson, P.M.; Betancourt, J.L.; Binney, H.A.; Brewer, S.; Bush, M.B.; Chase, B.M.; Cheddadi, R.; et al. Past and future global transformation of terrestrial ecosystems under climate change. Science 2018, 361, 920–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gong, M.H.; Guan, T.P.; Hou, M.; Liu, G.; Zhou, T.Y. Hopes and challenges for giant panda conservation under climate change in the Qinling Mountains of China. Ecol. Evol. 2017, 7, 596–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Franks, S.J.; Sim, S.; Weis, A.E. Rapid evolution of flowering time by an annual plant in response to a climate fluctuation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 1278–1282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Solomon, S.; Qin, D.; Manning, M.; Chen, Z.; Marquis, M. IPCC 2007: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007; Chapter 1, 95–123. Available online: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_wg1_report_the_physical_science_basis.htm (accessed on 10 June 2024).
  11. Hickling, R.; Roy, D.B.; Hill, J.K.; Fox, R.; Thomas, C.D. The distributions of a wide range of taxonomic groups are expanding polewards. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2006, 12, 450–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sharma, S.; Andrus, R.; Bergeron, Y.; Bogdziewicz, M.; Bragg, D.C.; Brockway, D.; Cleavitt, N.L.; Courbaud, B.; Das, A.J.; Dietze, M.; et al. North American tree migration paced by climate in the West, lagging in the East. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2022, 119, e2116691118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Qiu, T.; Sharma, S.; Woodall, C.W.; Clark, J.S. Niche Shifts From Trees to Fecundity to Recruitment That Determine Species Response to Climate Change. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2021, 9, 719141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lenarz, M.S.; Nelson, M.E.; Schrage, M.W.; Edwards, A.J. Temperature Mediated Moose Survival in Northeastern Minnesota. J. Wildl. Manag. 2009, 73, 503–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Pérez-Girón, J.C.; Alvarez-Alvarez, P.; Ballesteros, F.; López-Bao, J.V. Potential impacts of climate change on wild cherry distribution and associated consequences on brown bears. Biol. Conserv. 2024, 289, 110390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Gábor, L.; Jetz, W.; Zarzo-Arias, A.; Winner, K.; Yanco, S.; Pinkert, S.; Marsh, C.J.; Rogan, M.S.; Mäkinen, J.; Rocchini, D.; et al. Species distribution models affected by positional uncertainty in species occurrences can still be ecologically interpretable. Ecography 2023, 2023, e06358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wang, C.Y.; Xu, Y.W.; Gu, H.F.; Luo, Z.H.; Luo, Z.H.; Su, R.G. Potential geographical distribution of harmful algal blooms caused by the toxic dinoflagellate Karenia mikimotoi in the China Sea. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 906, 167741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. 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]
  19. Phillips, S.J.; Dudík, M. Modeling of species distributions with Maxent:: New extensions and a comprehensive evaluation. Ecography 2008, 31, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Elith, J.; Leathwick, J.R. Species Distribution Models: Ecological Explanation and Prediction Across Space and Time. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2009, 40, 677–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Elith, J.; Phillips, S.J.; Hastie, T.; Dudík, M.; Chee, Y.E.; Yates, C.J. A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers. Distrib. 2011, 17, 43–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Liu, T. Population Ecology of Natural Japanese Yew. Ph.D. Thesis, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin, China, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  23. Chen, J. Study on the Suitable Distribution Area of Taxus cuspidata. Master’s Thesis, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  24. Cheng, B.B.; Zheng, Y.Q.; Sun, Q.W. Genetic diversity and population structure of Taxus cuspidata in the Changbai Mountains assessed by chloroplast DNA sequences and microsatellite markers. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2015, 63, 157–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Su, J. The Population Dynamics of Taxus cuspidata: Evidence FromCytoplasmic and Nuclear Genome Fragements. Master’s Thesis, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  26. Feng, J. The Interaction between Wapiti (Cervus elaphus), Sika Deer (Cervus nippon), Roe Deer (Capreolus pygargus) and Japanese Yew (Taxus cuspidata) in the Southern of Laoyaling Mountains, Northeastern China. Master’s Thesis, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin, China, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  27. Zhu, M.; Yang, M.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, M. Wintering Diet of Red and Roe Deer in Heilongjiang Muling Japnaese Yew National Reserve. J. North-East For. Univ. 2019, 47, 100–104. [Google Scholar]
  28. Yang, L. The Study on Community Characteristics in Relation with Influence Factors of Taxus cuspidata. Master’s Thesis, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  29. Diao, Y.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Tian, S. Population structure characteristics of Taxus cuspidata. Sci. Sin. Vitae 2020, 50, 391–397. [Google Scholar]
  30. Jian-Guo, W.U.; Jia-Jia, L. Potential Effects of Climate Change on the Distribution of Dove Trees (Davidia Involucrata Baill) in China. Res. Environ. Sci. 2009, 22, 1371–1381. [Google Scholar]
  31. Niu, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, Y.; Qiu, Y.; Wang, D.; Zhou, S. Mammal Diversity and Prey Resource of Amur Tigerin Heilongjiang Muling Japanese Yew National Nature Reserve. Chin. J. Wildl. 2021, 042, 355–362. [Google Scholar]
  32. Thomson, A.M.; Calvin, K.V.; Smith, S.J.; Kyle, G.P.; Volke, A.; Patel, P.; Delgado-Arias, S.; Bond-Lamberty, B.; Wise, M.A.; Clarke, L.E.; et al. RCP4.5: A pathway for stabilization of radiative forcing by 2100. Clim. Chang. 2011, 109, 77–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ritchie, J.; Dowlatabadi, H. Why do climate change scenarios return to coal? Energy 2017, 140, 1276–1291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hausfather, Z.; Peters, G.P. Emissions—The ‘business as usual’ story is misleading. Nature 2020, 577, 618–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Liu, C.R.; Berry, P.M.; Dawson, T.P.; Pearson, R.G. Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distributions. Ecography 2005, 28, 385–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Han, M.; Bai, S.; Sun, S.; Yan, J.; Zhang, C.; Zhang, C.; Zhang, J.; You, M.; Li, D.; Yan, X. Simulation of Elymus sibiricus L.Distribution in Tibetan Plateau Based on MaxEnt Model. Acta Agrestia Sin. 2021, 29, 374–382. [Google Scholar]
  37. Mahatara, D.; Acharya, A.K.; Dhakal, B.P.; Sharma, D.K.; Ulak, S.; Paudel, P. Maxent modelling for habitat suitability of vulnerable tree Dalbergia latifolia in Nepal. Silva Fenn. 2021, 55, 10441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Brown, J.L. SDMtoolbox: A python-based GIS toolkit for landscape genetic, biogeographic and species distribution model analyses. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2014, 5, 694–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zhou, W.Y.; Li, B.X.; Xu, H.; Liang, Z.R.; Lu, X.P.; Yang, L.; Wang, W.J. Potential distribution of two economic laver species-Neoporphyra haitanensis and Neopyropia yezoensis under climate change based on MaxEnt prediction and phylogeographic profiling. Ecol. Indic. 2023, 150, 110219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Raich, J.W.; Schlesinger, W.H. The global carbon dioxide flux in soil respiration and its relationship to vegetation and climate. Tellus B 1992, 44, 81–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wu, J.; Lv, J.; Ai, L. The impacts of climate change on the biodiversity: Vulnerability and Adaptation. Ecol. Environ. Sci. 2009, 18, 693–703. [Google Scholar]
  42. Bergquist, J.; Bergström, R.; Zakharenka, A. Responses of young Norway spruce (Picea abies) to winter browsing by roe deer (Capreolus capreolus): Effects on height growth and stem morphology. Scand. J. For. Res. 2003, 18, 368–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wan, J.; Wang, C.; Han, S.; Yu, J. The Planning of Priority Protection Area for Taxus cuspidata under Climate Change. J. Shenyang Agric. Univ. 2014, 45, 28–32. [Google Scholar]
  44. Tian, X.; Chen, H.; Zhong, L.; Huang, H.; Liu, X.; Zhang, Z.; Yang, M.; Zhou, S. Population size and habitat suitability evaluation of wapiti (Cervus canadensis xanthopygus) in Muling forest area, southern Laoyeling, Heilongjiang Province, China. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2022, 42, 5980–5989. [Google Scholar]
  45. Zhou, S.; Liang, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Jin, G.; Na, C. A Study of Prey Source on Amur Tiger and Amur Leopard in Laoyeling Amur Tiger National Nature Reserve of Heilongjiang Province. For. Sci. Technol. 2018, 43, 4–6. [Google Scholar]
  46. Yang, S.; Wang, H.; Jing, W.; Wang, Q.; Yan, H.; Qiu, X.; Jian, H. Simulation of climate change effect on the global distribution of Rosa multiflora. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 2024, 35, 1897–1906. [Google Scholar]
  47. Martin, G.M.; Bellouin, N.; Collins, W.J.; Culverwell, I.D.; Halloran, P.R.; Hardiman, S.C.; Hinton, T.J.; Jones, C.D.; Mcdonald, R.E.; Mclaren, A.J.; et al. The HadGEM2 family of Met Office Unified Model climate configurations. Geosci. Model Dev. 2011, 4, 723–757. [Google Scholar]
  48. Ozturk, T.; Ceber, Z.P.; Türkes, M.; Kurnaz, M.L. Projections of climate change in the Mediterranean Basin by using downscaled global climate model outputs. Int. J. Climatol. 2015, 35, 4276–4292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Yan, H.Y.; Feng, L.; Zhao, Y.F.; Feng, L.; Wu, D.; Zhu, C.P. Prediction of the spatial distribution of Alternanthera philoxeroides in China based on ArcGIS and MaxEnt. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2020, 21, e00856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Forests 15 01983 g001
Figure 1. Location of the Muling National Nature Reserve, Heilongjiang Province, China.
Figure 1. Location of the Muling National Nature Reserve, Heilongjiang Province, China.
Forests 15 01983 g001
Forests 15 01983 g002
Figure 2. The current habitat suitability of Japanese yew and suitable feeding regions for deer from 2021 to 2024.
Figure 2. The current habitat suitability of Japanese yew and suitable feeding regions for deer from 2021 to 2024.
Forests 15 01983 g002
Forests 15 01983 g003
Figure 3. Future habitat suitability for Japanese yew [(a) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario, (b) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario, (c) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario and (d) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario].
Figure 3. Future habitat suitability for Japanese yew [(a) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario, (b) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario, (c) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario and (d) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario].
Forests 15 01983 g003
Forests 15 01983 g004
Figure 4. Changes in altitude of future growth regions of Japanese yew under different scenarios.
Figure 4. Changes in altitude of future growth regions of Japanese yew under different scenarios.
Forests 15 01983 g004
Forests 15 01983 g005
Figure 5. Suitable Japanese yew feeding regions for wapiti (A) and Siberian roe deer (B) in the future [(a) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario, (b) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario, (c) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario and (d) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario].
Figure 5. Suitable Japanese yew feeding regions for wapiti (A) and Siberian roe deer (B) in the future [(a) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario, (b) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario, (c) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario and (d) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario].
Forests 15 01983 g005
Forests 15 01983 g006
Figure 6. The distribution of future Japanese yew under feeding pressure of two deer species (Wapiti: (A) Siberian roe deer: (B)) [(a) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario, (b) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario, (c) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario and (d) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario].
Figure 6. The distribution of future Japanese yew under feeding pressure of two deer species (Wapiti: (A) Siberian roe deer: (B)) [(a) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario, (b) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario, (c) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario and (d) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario].
Forests 15 01983 g006
Forests 15 01983 g007
Figure 7. Centroid migration from 2041 to 2100.
Figure 7. Centroid migration from 2041 to 2100.
Forests 15 01983 g007
Forests 15 01983 g008
Figure 8. Future habitat suitability for Japanese yew (No species of feeding deer) [(a) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario, (b) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario, (c) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario and (d) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario].
Figure 8. Future habitat suitability for Japanese yew (No species of feeding deer) [(a) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario, (b) From 2041 to 2060 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario, (c) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP2-4.5 scenario and (d) From 2081 to 2100 in the SSP5-8.5 scenario].
Forests 15 01983 g008
Table 1. The variables used in this study are as follows.
Table 1. The variables used in this study are as follows.
VariableDescriptionUnitSource
Forest densityForest coverage density%Landsat 8
AltitudeAltitudemDEM
AspectAspectDegreesDEM
SlopeSlope%DEM
Bio2Mean of monthly (max temp–min temp)°CWorldClim
Bio3Isothermality—WorldClim
Bio4Temperature Seasonality—WorldClim
Bio12Annual PrecipitationmmWorldClim
Bio16Precipitation of Wettest QuartermmWorldClim
Bio17Precipitation of Driest QuartermmWorldClim
Wapiti feeding pressureWapiti feeding pressure—Fieldwork
Siberian roe deer feeding pressureSiberian roe deer feeding pressure—Fieldwork
Table 2. Scope of suitability prediction for the habitats of Japanese yew in the protected regions under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios from 2041 to 2100. Values are expressed in km2, and % represents the percentage of the total area that is suitable/unsuitable. (The total area is 356.48 km2).
Table 2. Scope of suitability prediction for the habitats of Japanese yew in the protected regions under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios from 2041 to 2100. Values are expressed in km2, and % represents the percentage of the total area that is suitable/unsuitable. (The total area is 356.48 km2).
Habitat TypeScenario: SSP2-4.5Scenario: SSP5-8.5
2041–20602081–21002041–20602081–2100
Unsuitable340.54 (80.8%)346.76 (88.29%)336.46 (75.88%)344.43 (85.48%)
Suitable15.94 (19.2%)9.72 (11.71%)20.02 (24.12%)12.05 (14.52%)
Table 3. The MaxEnt model was used to simulate the key factors and contributions of Wapiti and Siberian roe deer foraging in Japanese yew under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios from 2041 to 2100. The contribution unit is %.
Table 3. The MaxEnt model was used to simulate the key factors and contributions of Wapiti and Siberian roe deer foraging in Japanese yew under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios from 2041 to 2100. The contribution unit is %.
SpeciesScenario: SSP2-4.5Scenario: SSP5-8.5
2041–20602081–21002041–20602081–2100
WapitiBio1745.6Bio1747.2Bio1747.2Bio1742.4
Bio1232.5Bio1228.6Aspect14.2Bio1229.1
Bio410.5Bio49.3Bio1213.5Aspect11.9
Siberian roe deerBio1729.8Bio1740.5Bio1753Bio1739.6
Bio1229.7Bio1237.8Altitude14.8Bio1222.2
Aspect9.5Aspect6.9Bio412.5Aspect9.3
Table 4. Scope of habitat suitability of Wapiti and Siberian roe deer foraging Japanese yew in the reserve under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios from 2041 to 2100. Values are expressed in km2, and % represents the percentage change.
Table 4. Scope of habitat suitability of Wapiti and Siberian roe deer foraging Japanese yew in the reserve under SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios from 2041 to 2100. Values are expressed in km2, and % represents the percentage change.
SpeciesHabitat TypeScenario: SSP2-4.5Scenario: SSP5-8.5
2041–20602081–21002041–20602081–2100
WapitiSuitable6.41 (40.24%)4.67 (48%)7.77 (38.83%)3.89 (32.26%)
Unsuitable9.53 (59.76%)5.05 (52%)12.25 (61.17%)8.16 (67.74%)
Siberian roe deerSuitable9.53 (59.76%)8.16 (84%)10.69 (53.4%)7.39 (61.29%)
Unsuitable6.41 (40.24%)1.56 (16%)9.33 (46.6%)4.66 (38.71%)
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

Wang, X.; Feng, J.; Hong, Y.; Du, H.; Zhang, M.; Zhang, W. The Future Migration Direction of Deer and Japanese Yew Is Consistent Under Climate Change. Forests 2024, 15, 1983. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15111983

AMA Style

Wang X, Feng J, Hong Y, Du H, Zhang M, Zhang W. The Future Migration Direction of Deer and Japanese Yew Is Consistent Under Climate Change. Forests. 2024; 15(11):1983. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15111983

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Xianzhe, Jianan Feng, Yang Hong, Hairong Du, Minghai Zhang, and Weiqi Zhang. 2024. "The Future Migration Direction of Deer and Japanese Yew Is Consistent Under Climate Change" Forests 15, no. 11: 1983. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15111983

APA Style

Wang, X., Feng, J., Hong, Y., Du, H., Zhang, M., & Zhang, W. (2024). The Future Migration Direction of Deer and Japanese Yew Is Consistent Under Climate Change. Forests, 15(11), 1983. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15111983

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