Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40078684›Full record

ReviewCambridge prisms. Extinction2023

Predicting extinctions with species distribution models.

Damaris Zurell, Susanne A Fritz, Anna Rönnfeldt, Manuel J Steinbauer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cambridge prisms. Extinction, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Providing regular and frequent maps of losses and gains of farmland birds based on European monitoring data.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Cambridge prisms. Extinction · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Damaris ZurellInstitute for Biochemistry and Biology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4628-3558
Susanne A FritzSenckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (S-BiKF), Frankfurt, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4085-636X
Anna RönnfeldtInstitute for Biochemistry and Biology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.
Manuel J SteinbauerBayreuth Center of Ecology and Environmental Research (BayCEER), University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7142-9272

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predictions of species-level extinction risk from climate change are mostly based on species distribution models (SDMs). Reviewing the literature, we summarise why the translation of SDM results to extinction risk is conceptually and methodologically challenged and why critical SDM assumptions are unlikely to be met under climate change. Published SDM-derived extinction estimates are based on a positive relationship between range size decline and extinction risk, which empirically is not well understood. Importantly, the classification criteria used by the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species were not meant for this purpose and are often misused. Future predictive studies would profit considerably from a better understanding of the extinction risk-range decline relationship, particularly regarding the persistence and non-random distribution of the few last individuals in dwindling populations. Nevertheless, in the face of the ongoing climate and biodiversity crises, there is a high demand for predictions of future extinction risks. Despite prevailing challenges, we agree that SDMs currently provide the most accessible method to assess climate-related extinction risk across multiple species. We summarise current good practice in how SDMs can serve to classify species into IUCN extinction risk categories and predict whether a species is likely to become threatened under future climate. However, the uncertainties associated with translating predicted range declines into quantitative extinction risk need to be adequately communicated and extinction predictions should only be attempted with carefully conducted SDMs that openly communicate the limitations and uncertainty.

Indexed as

biodiversity lossclimate changedistributionhabitat lossscenarios and forecasts

Identifiers

PMID40078684
PMCPMC11895758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.