ArticleBMC ecology and evolution2025
Climatic data sources and limitations of ecological niche models impact the estimations of historical ranges and niche overlaps in distantly related Korean salamanders.
Article in BMC ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Correction: Climatic data sources and limitations of ecological niche models impact the estimations of historical ranges and niche overlaps in distantly related Korean salamanders.BMC ecology and evolution · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEcological niche models (ENMs) and analyses of niche overlap/divergence have become popular methods in ecology and evolutionary biology. These analyses rely on environmental data available from several databases. However, the influence of data sources on these analyses is rarely tested. Here, we test the impact of climatic data choice on the prediction of current and Plio-Pleistocene suitable habitats for two distantly related, but broadly sympatric, salamanders endemic to the Korean Peninsula. We ran MaxEnt separately on WorldClim and CHELSA climate data. We then hindcasted ENMs to five time periods of the Plio-Pleistocene, bracketing the estimated intraspecific divergence times for these species. We then quantified the differences in predictions between WorldClim- and CHELSA-based models. Also, given the sympatry and similar habitat requirements of the two species, we tested for niche overlaps using niche identity and background tests and tested the sensitivity of the results to climatic data choice.
resultsThe ENMs successfully predicted contemporary suitable habitats for the two species. However, the predictions were highly sensitive to climatic data choice as well as variable combinations. The hindcasted ENMs produced contrasting predictions depending on the choice of climatic dataset and failed to predict suitable habitats for some Pleistocene time periods regardless of the climatic data choice. The niche analyses were also sensitive to climatic data choice, with results suggesting either niche overlaps or divergence depending on the climatic dataset used for the analyses.
conclusionsOur study highlights the influence of climatic data choice on the outcomes of ENMs and niche analyses. Our results also underscore the limitations of macroclimate-based ENMs, especially when the species is likely buffered from macroclimatic changes by microhabitat. We argue for the need for additional ecological, ecophysiological, and population genomic studies to better understand the range formation of these enigmatic species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.