Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-wpx69 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-25T15:23:06.738Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predicting suitable habitat for the endangered plant Cephalotaxus oliveri Mast. in China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2022

Chunping Xie Open the ORCID record for Chunping Xie [Opens in a new window] ,
Boyang Huang ,
CY Jim ,
Dawei Liu ,
Chang Liu  and
Zhenxiang Zhu
Chunping Xie
Affiliation:
Biology Department of Sciences College, Qiongtai Normal University, Haikou 571127, China
Boyang Huang
Affiliation:
College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China
CY Jim*
Affiliation:
Department of Social Sciences, Education University of Hong Kong, Tai Po, Hong Kong, China
Dawei Liu
Affiliation:
Nanjing Forest Police College, Nanjing 210023, China
Chang Liu
Affiliation:
Nanjing Institute for Comprehensive Utilization of Wild Plants, China CO-OP, Nanjing 211111, China
Zhenxiang Zhu
Affiliation:
Nanjing Forest Police College, Nanjing 210023, China
*
Author for correspondence: Professor CY Jim, Email: cyjim@eduhk.hk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The coniferous shrub Oliver’s plum yew (Cephalotaxus oliveri) is endemic to southern China with potential medicinal use for cancer treatment and ecological value in sustaining China’s threatened subtropical forest ecosystems. Comprehensive understanding of the current spatial patterns of this vulnerable species vis-à-vis climatic conditions is crucial for its sustained economic use and conservation. Based on 100 reliable occurrence records and nine environmental variables, MaxEnt and QGIS programs were used to predict the potential geographical distribution of C. oliveri in China. Combined with percentage contribution and permutation importance, the jackknife statistical method was used to test and evaluate pertinent factors restricting the potential distribution of C. oliveri. The response curves of critical bioclimatic factors were employed to determine the potential species range. The current core potential distribution areas were concentrated in China’s central and south-west regions. Temperature was identified as the crucial determinant of species distribution patterns, particularly the mean temperature of the coldest quarter. Precipitation was a necessary but not critical secondary factor. These findings should inform the ex situ conservation and cultivation of C. oliveri in China and its introduction to other parts of the world for similar purposes.

Keywords

Cephalotaxus oliveri Mast.climatic factorMaxEnt modellingpotential rangespecies distribution model (SDM)
Type
Research Paper
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , March 2023 , pp. 50 - 57
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Foundation for Environmental Conservation

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdelaal, M, Fois, M, Fenu, G, Bacchetta, G (2019) Using MaxEnt modeling to predict the potential distribution of the endemic plant Rosa arabica Crép. in Egypt. Ecological Informatics 50: 68–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abolmaali, SM-R, Tarkesh, M, Bashari, H (2018) MaxEnt modeling for predicting suitable habitats and identifying the effects of climate change on a threatened species, Daphne mucronata, in central Iran. Ecological Informatics 43: 116–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Affolter, JM (1997) Essential role of horticulture in rare plant conservation. HortScience 32: 29–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ai, Q, Chen, M, Liang, X (2010) Research progress on Cephalotaxus oliveri . Guizhou Agricultural Sciences 38: 181–183.Google Scholar
Baum, KA, Haynes, KJ, Dillemuth, FP, Cronin, JT (2004) The matrix enhances the effectiveness of corridors and stepping stones. Ecology 85: 2671–2676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Begum, F, de Bruyn, LL, Kristiansen, P, Islam, MA (2021) Institutionalising co-management activities for conservation of forest resources: evidence from the Sundarban mangrove forest management of Bangladesh. Journal of Environmental Management 298: 113504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chandra, A, Fauzi, D, Khatimah, FH, Wicaksono, SA (2022) Assessing drivers of forest conservation in Simancuang Village forest, west Sumatra. Small-scale Forestry 21: 93–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, S, Sima, Y, Fang, B (2003) The genetic diversity of Cephalotaxus oliveri and its endangered causes. Journal of Northwest Forestry University 18: 29–32.Google Scholar
Cornett, MW, Reich, PB, Puettmann, KJ, Frelich, LE (2000) Seedbed and moisture availability determine safe sites for early Thuja occidentalis (Cupressaceae) regeneration. American Journal of Botany 87: 1807–1814.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cotrina Sánchez, A, Rojas Briceño, NB, Bandopadhyay, S, Ghosh, S, Torres Guzmán, C, Oliva, M et al. (2021) Biogeographic distribution of Cedrela spp. genus in Peru using MaxEnt modeling: a conservation and restoration approach. Diversity 13: 261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dad, JM, Rashid, I (2022) Differential responses of Kashmir Himalayan threatened medicinal plants to anticipated climate change. Environmental Conservation 49: 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deng, T, Abbott, RJ, Li, W, Sun, H, Volis, S (2019) Genetic diversity hotspots and refugia identified by mapping multi-plant species haplotype diversity in China. Israel Journal of Plant Sciences 66: 136–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eiserhardt, WL, Svenning, J-C, Kissling, WD, Balslev, H (2011) Geographical ecology of the palms (Arecaceae): determinants of diversity and distributions across spatial scales. Annals of Botany 108: 1391–1416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elith, J, Graham, CH, Anderson, RP, Dudík, M, Ferrier, S, Guisan, A et al. (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29: 129–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elith, J, Leathwick, JR (2009) Species distribution models: ecological explanation and prediction across space and time. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 40: 677–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feng, B, Wei, H (2017) Community structure characteristics of Cephalotaxus oliveri in the Qiandongnan Miao and Dong Autonomous Prefecture. Hunan Forestry Science & Technology 44: 34–42.Google Scholar
Fu, C, Lu, J, Li, Z, Liu, R (2017) Analysis of the characteristics of geographical distribution and main community of species Cephalotaxus oliveri in Jiangxi. Jiangxi Science 35: 16–23.Google Scholar
García, D, Zamora, R, Gómez, JM, Jordano, P, Hódar, JA (2000) Geographical variation in seed production, predation and abortion in Juniperus communis throughout its range in Europe. Journal of Ecology 88: 435–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, J, Gui, Y, Fu, Q, Zou, J, Zhao, J (2021) Isolation, identification and antimicrobial activity analysis of endophytic fungi from Cephalotaxus oliveri . Journal of Mountain Agriculture and Biology 40: 66–69.Google Scholar
Helsen, K, Van Meerbeek, K, Honnay, O, Hermy, M (2011) Conservation credit for plant species diversity of small nature reserves in an agricultural matrix. Plant Ecology and Evolution 144: 289–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hijmans, RJ, Guarino, L, Cruz, M, Rojas, E (2001) Computer tools for spatial analysis of plant genetic resources data: 1. DIVA-GIS. Plant Genetic Resources Newsletter 127: 15–19.Google Scholar
Horvath, D (2009) Common mechanisms regulate flowering and dormancy. Plant Science 177: 523–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kari, S, Korhonen-Kurki, K (2013) Framing local outcomes of biodiversity conservation through ecosystem services: a case study from Ranomafana, Madagascar. Ecosystem Services 3: e32–e39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khanum, R, Mumtaz, A, Kumar, S (2013) Predicting impacts of climate change on medicinal asclepiads of Pakistan using MaxEnt modeling. Acta Oecologica 49: 23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, X, Li, Y, Fang, Y (2018) Prediction of potential suitable distribution areas of Quercus fabri in China based on an optimized Maxent model. Scientia Silvae Sinicae 54: 154–165.Google Scholar
Liao, W, Yang, Y. (2022) Cephalotaxus oliveri. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2013 (p. e.T32331A2815247). Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
Liu, C, Huo, H, Tian, L, Dong, X, Xu, J, Qi, D et al. (2020) Prediction of potential geographical distribution patterns of Pyrus xerophila under different climate scenarios. Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao (The Journal of Applied Ecology) 31: 4073–4079.Google ScholarPubMed
Lorimer, J, Sandom, C, Jepson, P, Doughty, C, Barua, M, Kirby, KJ (2015) Rewilding: science, practice, and politics. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 40: 39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, G, Guo, N, Wang, X, Li, J, Jin, Z, Han, Y et al. (2020) Cytotoxic secondary metabolites from the vulnerable conifer Cephalotaxus oliveri and its associated endophytic fungus Alternaria alternate Y-4-2. Bioorganic Chemistry 105: 104445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacArthur, RH, Wilson, EO (2016) The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Margules, C, Higgs, A, Rafe, R (1982) Modern biogeographic theory: are there any lessons for nature reserve design? Biological Conservation 24: 115–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCune, JL (2016) Species distribution models predict rare species occurrences despite significant effects of landscape context. Journal of Applied Ecology 53: 1871–1879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merow, C, Smith, MJ, Silander, JA Jr (2013) A practical guide to MaxEnt for modeling species’ distributions: what it does, and why inputs and settings matter. Ecography 36: 1058–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mounce, R, Smith, P, Brockington, S (2017) Ex situ conservation of plant diversity in the world’s botanic gardens. Nature Plants 3: 795–802.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muscarella, R, Galante, PJ, Soley-Guardia, M, Boria, RA, Kass, JM, Uriarte, M, Anderson, RP (2014) ENMeval: an R package for conducting spatially independent evaluations and estimating optimal model complexity for MaxEnt ecological niche models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 11: 1198–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, TT, Gliottone, I, Pham, MP (2021) Current and future predicting habitat suitability map of Cunninghamia konishii Hayata using MaxEnt model under climate change in northern Vietnam. European Journal of Ecology 7: 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, H, Guo, Y, Su, Y, Wang, T (2011) Development of microsatellite loci for Cephalotaxus oliveri (Cephalotaxaceae) and cross-amplification in Cephalotaxus . American Journal of Botany 98: e229–e232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pan, YQ, Zeng, X, Chen, WD, Tang, XR, Dai, K, Du, YJ, Song, XQ (2021) Chilling rather than photoperiod controls budburst for gymnosperm species in subtropical China. Journal of Plant Ecology 15: 100–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, SJ, Anderson, RP, Dudík, M, Schapire, RE, Blair, ME (2017) Opening the black box: an open-source release of MaxEnt . Ecography 40: 887–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, SJ, Anderson, RP, Schapire, RE (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecological Modelling 190: 231–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puchałka, R, Dyderski, MK, Vítková, M, Sádlo, J, Klisz, M, Netsvetov, M et al. (2021) Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia L.) range contraction and expansion in Europe under changing climate. Global Change Biology 27: 1587–1600.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
QGIS (2021) QGIS Geographic Information System (version 3.20). Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. Switzerland: QGIS Association.Google Scholar
Qin, A, Liu, B, Guo, Q, Bussmann, RW, Ma, F, Jian, Z et al. (2017) MaxEnt modeling for predicting impacts of climate change on the potential distribution of Thuja sutchuenensis Franch., an extremely endangered conifer from southwestern China. Global Ecology and Conservation 10: 139–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ray, D, Behera, MD, Jacob, J (2018) Evaluating ecological niche models: a comparison between MaxEnt and GARP for predicting distribution of Hevea brasiliensis in India. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India Section B: Biological Sciences 88: 1337–1343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruan, Y, Patrick, JW, Bouzayen, M, Osorio, S, Fernie, AR (2012) Molecular regulation of seed and fruit set. Trends in Plant Science 17: 656–665.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Song, Y, Zhang, G, Jia, Q, Wen, Q, Mo, X, Liu, L (2021) Prediction of potential distribution of Ormosia henryi in China under climate change. Journal of Northwest Forestry University 36: 108–115.Google Scholar
Sorte, CJ, Ibáñez, I, Blumenthal, DM, Molinari, NA, Miller, LP, Grosholz, ED et al. (2013) Poised to prosper? A cross-system comparison of climate change effects on native and non-native species performance. Ecology Letters 16: 261–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southammakoth, S, Craig, I (2000) Participatory Conservation Co-Management: A Component Description. Laos: MekongInfo.Google Scholar
Travers, E, Härdtle, W, Matthies, D (2021) Corridors as a tool for linking habitats – shortcomings and perspectives for plant conservation. Journal for Nature Conservation 60: 125974.Google Scholar
Wan, Q, Zhang, X, Zhang, Y, Yue, Y, Huang, K, Cheddadi, R, Zheng, Z (2021) Major forest changes in subtropical China since the last Ice Age. Forests 12: 1314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, T, Wang, Z, Xia, F, Su, Y (2016) Local adaptation to temperature and precipitation in naturally fragmented populations of Cephalotaxus oliveri, an endangered conifer endemic to China. Scientific Reports 6: 25031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiens, JJ, Ackerly, DD, Allen, AP, Anacker, BL, Buckley, LB, Cornell, HV et al. (2010) Niche conservatism as an emerging principle in ecology and conservation biology. Ecology Letters 13: 1310–1324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wisz, MS, Pottier, J, Kissling, WD, Pellissier, L, Lenoir, J, Damgaard, CF et al. (2013) The role of biotic interactions in shaping distributions and realised assemblages of species: implications for species distribution modelling. Biological Reviews 88: 15–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xie, C, Huang, B, Jim, CY, Han, W, Liu, D (2021) Predicting differential habitat suitability of Rhodomyrtus tomentosa under current and future climate scenarios in China. Forest Ecology and Management 501: 119696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Z, Bai, Y, Alatalo, JM, Huang, Z, Yang, F, Pu, X et al. (2021) Spatio-temporal variation in potential habitats for rare and endangered plants and habitat conservation based on the maximum entropy model. Science of the Total Environment 784: 147080.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, F, Wang, Z, Pan, W, Li, Y, Mai, L, Sun, J, Ma, G (1978) Study on the antitumor plant Cephalotaxus oliveri Mast. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 20: 35–40.Google Scholar
Zhang, JW, D’Rozario, A, Liang, XQ, Zhou, ZK (2019) Middle Miocene Cephalotaxus (Taxaceae) from Yunnan, southwest China, and its implications to taxonomy and evolution of the genus. Palaeoworld 28: 381–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, K, Yao, L, Meng, J, Tao, J (2018) MaxEnt modeling for predicting the potential geographical distribution of two peony species under climate change. Science of the Total Environment 634: 1326–1334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, Y, Wang, Y, Zhang, M, Ma, K (2014) Climate change threats to protected plants of China: an evaluation based on species distribution modeling. Chinese Science Bulletin 59: 4652–4659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Y, Hu, Y, Lin, J, Wang, X (1997) The biology and conservation of Cephalotaxus oliveri Mast. Guihaia 17: 249–254.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Xie et al. supplementary material

Xie et al. supplementary material

Download Xie et al. supplementary material(File)
File 1.4 MB