Climate variables are not the dominant predictor of Arctic shorebird distributions

Data curation: Christine M. Anderson, Jennie Rausch. Formal analysis: Christine M. Anderson. Funding acquisition: Jennie Rausch, Paul A. Smith. Investigation: Christine M. Anderson. Methodology: Christine M. Anderson, Paul A. Smith. Project administration: Christine M. Anderson, Jennie Rausch, Paul A. Smith. Resources: Jennie Rausch, Paul A. Smith. Supervision: Lenore Fahrig, Paul A. Smith. Validation: Christine M. Anderson. Visualization: Christine M. Anderson. Writing – original draft: Christine M. Anderson. Writing – review & editing: Christine M. Anderson, Lenore Fahrig, Jennie Rausch, Paul A. Smith. References 1. Peterson AT, Sobero´n J. Species Distribution Modeling and Ecological Niche Modeling: Getting the Concepts Right. Nat Conserv. 2012; 10(2):102–7. 2. Ramirez-Villegas J, Cuesta F, Devenish C, Peralvo M, Jarvis A, Arnillas CA. Using species distributions models for designing conservation strategies of Tropical Andean biodiversity under climate change. J Nat Conserv. 2014 Oct; 22(5):391–404. 3. Fong A, Viña Da´ vila N, Lo´ pez-Iborra GM. Amphibian Hotspots and Conservation Priorities in Eastern Cuba Identified by Species Distribution Modeling. Biotropica. 2015 Jan; 47(1):119–27. 4. Zhang MG, Zhou ZK, Chen WY, Slik JWF, Cannon CH, Raes N. Using species distribution modeling to improve conservation and land use planning of Yunnan, China. Biol Conserv. 2012 Sep; 153:257–64. 5. Kramer AM, Annis G, Wittmann ME, Chadderton WL, Rutherford ES, Lodge DM, et al. Suitability of Lau-

rentian Great Lakes for invasive species based on global species distribution models and local habitat. Ecosphere [Internet]. 2017 Jul [cited 2022 Oct 7];8(7). Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/10.1002/ecs2.1883 6. Root T. Environmental Factors Associated with Avian Distributional Boundaries. J Biogeogr. 1988 May; 15(3):489. 7. Sobero´n JM. Niche and area of distribution modeling: a population ecology perspective. Ecography. 2010 Feb; 33(1):159–67. 8. Langham GM, Schuetz JG, Distler T, Soykan CU, Wilsey C. Conservation Status of North American Birds in the Face of Future Climate Change. LaDeau SL, editor. PLOS ONE. 2015 Sep 2; 10(9): e0135350. 9. Oliver TH, Morecroft MD. Interactions between climate change and land use change on biodiversity: attribution problems, risks, and opportunities. WIREs Clim Change. 2014 May; 5(3):317–35. 10. Pearson RG, Dawson TP. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? Glob Ecol. 2003; 11. 11. Dyderski MK, Paź S, Frelich LE, Jagodziński AM. How much does climate change threaten European forest tree species distributions? Glob Change Biol. 2018 Mar; 24(3):1150–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/ gcb.13925 PMID: 28991410 12. Graham EM, Reside AE, Atkinson I, Baird D, Hodgson L, James CS, et al. Climate change and biodiver- sity in Australia: a systematic modelling approach to nationwide species distributions. Australas J Envi- ron Manag. 2019 Apr 3; 26(2):112–23.

13. Elith J, Leathwick JR. Species Distribution Models: Ecological Explanation and Prediction Across Space and Time. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2009 Dec 1; 40(1):677–97. 14. de Arau´jo CB, Marcondes-Machado LO, Costa GC. The importance of biotic interactions in species dis- tribution models: a test of the Eltonian noise hypothesis using parrots. Silman M, editor. J Biogeogr. 2014 Mar; 41(3):513–23. PLOS ONE Climate variables are not the dominant predictor of Arctic shorebird distributions PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0285115 May 17, 2023 12 / 14