Ecog-00931.Pdf

Home , Urocitellus

Ecography ECOG-00931 Santos, M. J., Thorne, J. H. and Moritz, C. 2014. Synchronicity in elevation range shifts among small mammal and vegetation over the last century is stronger for omnivores. – Ecography doi: 10.1111/ecog.00931

Supplementary material 1 Appendix 1. Descriptions of the species traits of the small mammal species analyzed in this study: (a) – PanTHERIA database, (b) from

2 Moritz et al. (2008), predicted effect and trait values (BMR – Basal metabolic rate, NBM – neonatal body mass, NH – non hibernator,

3 FH – facultative hibernator, OH – obligatory hibernator).

4 Table A1.1. Description of species traits used for this analysis.

Trait Description Metric Prediction Genus Genera to which each species e.g. Sorex, Microtus, etc. More related species would corresponds have more similar habitat preferences Home Range (a) Individual or social group home range km2 Smaller home ranges less likely to show synchronicity, time lag effect Terrestriality (a) Indicates if an individual is cursorial or 1 – cursorial, 2 – arboreal Arboreal species more likely arboreal to show synchronicity because they can move less across preferred vegetation Annual Rhythm (b) Indicates if a species undergoes or not Non hibernator, facultative Hibernators more likely to hibernation hibernator, obligatory show synchronicity because hibernator their life-cycle is extremely linked to habitat phenology Activity Cycle (b) Indicates if the species is diurnal, Diurnal, nocturnal, both Diurnal species more likely

nocturnal or both to show synchronicity because they may need more cover (a) Basal Metabolic Rate Indicates the metabolic rate for the mlO2 Higher metabolic rates more species expressed as volumetric unit of likely to show synchronicity oxygen because they need more energy Adult Mass (b) Body weight G Larger species are likely more mobile thus likely showing less synchronicity Max longevity (b) Number of months an individual Months Longer lived species are survives on average likely to show less synchronicity because it may take them longer to respond to changes in preferred vegetation type Diet (b) Dietary guild of a species Omnivore, herbivore, Specialists are more likely to granivore, insectivore show synchronicity because they are more tightly dependent on fewer food resources 5

6 Table A1.1 (cont.). Description of species traits used for this analysis.

Trait Description Metric Predictions Higher number of litters will Litters per year (b) Number of litters per year Litters lead to synchronicity Longer gestation length will Gestation length (a) Number of days for gestation Days decrease likelihood of synchronicity Higher number of newborns Litter size (b) Number of newborns per litter Individuals will increase the likelihood of synchronicity Higher neonatal body mass Neonatal body mass (a) Body weight at birth G will increase the likelihood of synchronicity Higher number of youngs per Number of surviving newborns per Youngs per year (b) Individuals year will increase the year likelihood of synchronicity 7

8 The predictions are that species that have very tight ecological requirements with their preferred habitats, will have to move along

9 with them – synchronicity. This can be achieved by either high fertility or high mobility, and lower energy requirements for survival.

11 Table A1.2. Trait values used for this analysis.

S. monticolus S. ornatus S. palustris O. beecheyi C. lateralis T. quadrimaculatus T. senex C. californicus P. boylii P. truei R. megalotis Genus Sorex Sorex Sorex Otospermophilus Callospermophilus Tamias Tamias Chaetodipus Peromyscus Peromyscus Reithrodontomys Home Range (a) 0.0017 -- 0.0023 0.0003 -- 0.0056 0.0100 -- 0.0028 0.0091 0.0010 Terrestriality (a) 1 -- 1 1 -- 2 2 ------2 Annual Rhythm (b) NH NH NH OH OH FH FH NH NH NH NH Activity Cycle (b) both both both diurnal diurnal diurnal diurnal nocturnal nocturnal nocturnal nocturnal BMR (a) -- 52.28 -- 317.78 204.67 -- -- 21.45 54.28 44.05 22.50 Adult Mass (b) 4 4 15 700 250 80 80 25 24 30 10 Max longevity (b) 6 6 6 36 36 24 24 12 12 6 6 Diet (b) insectivore insectivore insectivore omnivore omnivore granivore granivore granivore granivore omnivore omnivore Litters/year (b) 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 Gestation (a) -- -- 21 28.37 28.42 31.65 -- 25.16 23.3 32.37 23.5 Litter size (b) 6 5 6 6 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 NBM (a) -- 0.5 -- 9.29 6.09 -- -- 1.5 2.19 2.31 1.36 Youngs/year (b) 9 8 12 6 4 4 4 6 6 8 8

18 Table A1.2 (cont.). Trait values used for this analysis.

S. trowbridgii U. beldingi T. alpinus T. speciosus D. heermanni N. cinerea N. macrotis P. maniculatus M. californicus M. longicaudus M. montanus Z. princeps Genus Sorex Urocitellus Tamias Tamias Dipodomys Neotoma Neotoma Peromyscus Microtus Microtus Microtus Zapus Home Range (a) ------0.0100 -- 0.0300 -- 0.0020 0.0001 -- 0.0001 0.0019 Terrestriality (a) 1 1 2 2 1 -- -- 2 ------Annual Rhythm (b) NH OH FH FH NH NH NH NH NH NH NH OH Activity Cycle (b) both diurnal both diurnal nocturnal nocturnal nocturnal nocturnal both both both nocturnal BMR (a) -- 182.00 -- -- 73.17 168.59 -- 36.46 68.20 71.82 81.62 -- Adult Mass (b) 6 300 35 50 70 450 350 18 60 65 45 30 Max longevity (b) 6 36 24 24 36 36 36 6 6 6 6 24 Diet (b) insectivore herbivore granivore granivore granivore herbivore herbivore omnivore herbivore herbivore herbivore omnivore Litters/year (b) 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 4 3 4 1 Gestation (a) -- 26.19 -- -- 30.99 29.69 -- 26.68 21.18 -- 21.13 18.11 Litter size (b) 4 6 4 4 3 4 3 4 6 4 6 4 NBM (a) -- 6.86 -- -- 3.7 14.4 -- 1.73 3.28 -- 3.89 -- Youngs/year (b) 8 6 4 4 5 8 3 12 24 12 24 4

19 Appendix 2. Description of species habitat suitability index values.

20 Table A2.1. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships rankings for the mammal species in the analysis. Landcover legends in Figure

21 1.

Species AGR AGS ASP BAR BOW BOP CRC CPC DFR EPN FEW JPN JUN LAC LPN LSG MCH MCP Sorex monticolus 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sorex ornatus 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 Sorex palustris 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.20 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sorex trowbridgii 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 Otospermophilus beecheyi 1.00 1.00 0.59 0.33 0.60 0.62 0.59 0.54 0.35 0.52 0.00 0.52 0.36 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.56 0.55 Urocitellus beldingi 0.77 0.66 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.77 0.33 0.33 Callospermophilus lateralis 0.00 0.11 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.76 0.00 0.77 0.49 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.67 0.70 Tamias alpinus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tamias quadrimaculatus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.00 Tamias senex 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.20 0.00 0.45 0.65 0.00 0.65 0.31 0.00 0.49 0.32 0.30 0.30 Tamias speciosus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.33 Chaetodipus californicus 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85 Dipodomys heermanni 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.53 Neotoma cinerea 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.66 0.00 0.83 0.78 0.00 0.66 0.33 0.58 0.66 Neotoma macrotis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.66 0.72 0.58 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.72 Peromyscus boylii 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.63 0.51 0.56 0.62 0.76 0.00 0.71 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.97 0.72 Peromyscus maniculatus 0.66 0.66 0.33 0.33 0.58 0.58 0.56 0.58 0.61 0.86 0.66 0.64 0.84 0.00 0.88 0.43 0.90 0.90 Peromyscus truei 0.00 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.72 0.77 Reithrodontomys megalotis 0.89 0.92 0.33 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.41 0.52 0.54 0.33 0.66 0.33 0.45 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.51 0.61 Microtus californicus 0.77 0.92 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 Microtus longicaudus 0.77 1.00 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.33 0.66 0.68 0.50 0.00 0.69 0.33 0.33 0.33 Microtus montanus 0.66 0.50 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.33 0.43 0.48 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.33 0.33 Zapus princeps 0.00 0.33 0.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00

22 Table A2.1 (cont.). California Wildlife Habitat Relationships rankings for the mammal species in the analysis. Landcover legends in

23 Figure 1.

Species MHW MHC MRI PJN PPN RFR SMC SCN URB VRI VOW WTM WFR Sorex monticolus 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.33 Sorex ornatus 0.00 0.40 0.83 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.41 0.50 0.00 Sorex palustris 0.00 0.33 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.55 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.55 Sorex trowbridgii 0.00 0.63 0.33 0.00 0.60 0.33 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.63 Otospermophilus beecheyi 0.59 0.56 0.54 0.65 0.54 0.36 0.51 0.38 1.00 0.50 0.60 0.66 0.51 Urocitellus beldingi 0.00 0.33 0.47 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.33 Callospermophilus lateralis 0.73 0.73 0.55 0.50 0.73 0.77 0.73 0.76 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.11 0.73 Tamias alpinus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tamias quadrimaculatus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.00 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.74 Tamias senex 0.39 0.39 0.48 0.30 0.82 0.65 0.69 0.49 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.69 Tamias speciosus 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.52 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.52 Chaetodipus californicus 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.00 0.00 Dipodomys heermanni 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.33 0.00 Neotoma cinerea 0.62 0.40 0.66 0.66 0.00 0.82 0.57 0.68 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.55 0.57 Neotoma macrotis 0.72 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.49 0.11 0.63 Peromyscus boylii 0.71 0.74 0.66 0.76 0.52 0.00 0.73 0.56 0.00 0.66 0.63 0.00 0.73 Peromyscus maniculatus 0.56 0.83 0.74 0.86 0.66 0.66 0.74 0.66 0.66 0.62 0.58 0.33 0.74 Peromyscus truei 0.66 0.70 0.58 0.86 0.66 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.33 0.58 Reithrodontomys megalotis 0.43 0.39 0.74 0.38 0.48 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.60 0.43 0.50 0.33 Microtus californicus 0.33 0.41 0.66 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.66 0.50 0.45 1.00 0.00 Microtus longicaudus 0.00 0.42 0.77 0.33 0.52 0.68 0.33 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.33 Microtus montanus 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.45 0.43 0.33 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.33 Zapus princeps 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.57 0.58 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.87 0.57 24

25 Figure A2.1. Illustration of historic and modern habitat suitability and its change for (a) a contracting high-elevation species – Tamias

26 alpinus, (b) a non-changing ubiquous species – Peromyscus maniculatus, and (c) an expanding low-elevation species – Microtus

27 californicus. Top figures are historic suitability, middle figures are modern suitability and bottom figures are the difference in

28 suitability. Top and middle figures colors are: blue: no suitability, yellow to red low to high suitability. Bottom figure colors are: grey

29 for no change, blue to decrease in suitability from historic to modern and yellow to red increase in suitability from historic to modern

30 time periods. Circles represent aggregates.

32 (a) (b) (c)

33 Appendix 3. Species presence in aggregates as predicted by HSI and era. Conditional density plots and observed presence as a

34 function of predicted values: (a,b) S. monticolus, (c,d) S. ornatus, (e,f) S. palustris, (g,h) S. trowbridgii, (i,j) O. beecheyei, (k,l) U.

35 beldingii, (m,n) C. lateralis, (o,p) T. alpinus, (q,r) T. quadrimaculatus, (s,t) T. senex, (u,v) T. speciosus, (w,x) C. californicus, (y,z) D.

36 heermanni, (aa,bb) N. cinerea, (cc,dd) N. macrotis, (ee,ff) P. boylii, (gg,hh) P. maniculatus, (ii,jj) P. truei, (kk,ll) R. megalotis,

37 (mm,nn) M. californicus, (oo,pp) M. longicaudus, (qq,rr) M. montanus, and (ss,tt) Z. princeps.

38 (a) (b) (c) (d)

39 (e) (f) (g) (h)

40 (i) (j) (k) (l)

41 (m) (n) (o) (p)

42 (q) (r) (s) (t)

43 (u) (v) (w) (x)

44 (y) (z) (aa) (bb)

45 (cc) (dd) (ee) (ff)

46 (gg) (hh) (ii) (jj)

47 (kk) (ll) (mm) (nn)

48 (oo) (pp) (qq) (rr)

49 (ss) (tt)

50 Appendix 4. Tests of confounding factors to species placements on the plots in Figure 2.

51 The first test was to recreate the plot including only the most suitable habitats, with HSI values

52 >0.5. Figure AIV.1. shows a repetition of the same pattern as in Figure 2.

53 The second test was to assess if there was an effect of scale. Figure AIV.2. shows the regression

54 between transect wide habitat displacement against average trapping locations change in HSI

55 (R2=0.43; F=15.98, P-value= 0.0007); Figure AIV.3. shows the plot of the average habitat

56 displacement in traplines against species elevation range shifts.

58 Figure A4.1. Changes in species’ and most suitable habitats elevation range. The x axis

59 represents changes in habitat elevation ranges (positive values: increase in habitat elevation

60 range, negative values: decrease in habitat elevation range), the y axis represents changes in

61 species elevation range (positive values: increase species elevation range; negative values:

62 decrease species elevation range). Black triangles indicate species that have significantly

63 expanded their elevation range, white triangles indicate species that have significantly contracted

64 their elevation range, and white circles indicate species that have did not change their elevation

65 range.

67 3

68 Figure A4.2. Change in HSI at trapping locations as a function of transect wide habitat vertical

69 displacement. Regression was significant (R2=0.43; F=15.98, P-value= 0.0007) and with a

70 positive slope (0.004).

76 Figure A4.3. Changes in species’ elevation and trapping locations habitat vertical displacement.

77 The x axis represents changes in habitat elevation ranges (positive values: increase in habitat

78 elevation range, negative values: decrease in habitat elevation range), the y axis represents

79 changes in species elevation range (positive values: increase species elevation range; negative

80 values: decrease species elevation range). Black triangles indicate species that have significantly

81 expanded their elevation range, white triangles indicate species that have significantly contracted

82 their elevation range, and white circles indicate species that have did not change their elevation

83 range.

85 Appendix 5. Changes in species’ and per suitable vegetation type range change. The x axis

86 represents changes in each vegetation type elevation ranges (positive values: increase in

87 vegetation elevation range, negative values: decrease in vegetation elevation range), the y axis

88 represents changes in species elevation range (positive values: increase species elevation range;

89 negative values: decrease species elevation range). Black triangles indicate species that have

90 significantly expanded their elevation range, white triangles indicate species that have

91 significantly contracted their elevation range, and white circles indicate species that have did not

92 change their elevation range. Note that species that did not significantly change their elevation

93 range may have observed range changes, but they were less than 5% of their historic range

94 extent.

95 (a) (b)

96 (c) (d)

97 (e) (f)

98 (g) (h)

99 (i) (j)

100 (k) (l)

101 (m) (n)

102 (o) (p)

103 (q) (r)

104 (s) (t)

105 (u) (v)

106 (w) (x)

107 (y) (z)

108 (aa) (bb)

109 (cc) (dd)

110 (ee)

111 Appendix 6. Changes in species’ and per suitable vegetation type range limit change.

112 Table A6.1. Changes in species’ and each suitable vegetation type upper range limit range change.

Number of species for which Number of Type of species R2 F-value P-value

vegetation type is suitable species tracking

AGS 16 5 3 expand, 1 no change, 1 contract 0.04 0.6 0.45

ASC 9 3 1 expand, 2 no change 0.03 0.24 0.64

ASP 10 3 1 expand, 1 no change, 1 contract 0.09 0.82 0.39

BAR 3 0 -- NA NA NA

BOP 11 1 1 contract 0.16 1.67 0.23

BOW 11 0 -- NA NA NA

CPC 5 3 1 expand, 2 no change 0.005 0.02 0.9

CRC 8 0 -- 0.09 0.63 0.46

DFR 12 1 1 contract 0.09 1.04 0.33

EPN 14 3 3 contract 0.01 0.1 0.71

FEW 7 0 -- 0.02 0.105 0.76

JPN 14 1 1 contract 0.18 2.62 0.13

Number of species for which Number of Type of species R2 F-value P-value

vegetation type is suitable species tracking

JUN 10 1 1 expand 0.07 0.57 0.47

LAC 1 1 1 contract NA NA NA

LPN 13 1 1 contract 0.04 0.49 0.50

LSG 9 1 1 expand 0.013 0.09 0.77

MCH 18 7 3 expand, 3 no change, 1 contract 0.11 1.92 0.18

MCP 18 8 3 expand, 4 no change, 1 contract 0.14 2.68 0.12

MHC 15 7 3 expand, 3 no change, 1 contract 0.13 1.92 0.19

MHW 12 2 2 contract 0.04 0.42 0.53

MRI 19 4 2 expand, 1 no change, 1 contract 0.005 0.09 0.77

PJN 10 4 1 expand, 2 no change, 1 contract 0.12 1.068 0.33

PPN 15 0 -- 0.07 0.98 0.34

RFR 14 3 3 contract 0.28 4.66 0.05

SCN 15 2 2 contract 0.12 1.79 0.20

SGB 15 5 2 expand, 2 no change, 1 contract 0.13 1.97 0.18

Number of species for which Number of Type of species R2 F-value P-value

vegetation type is suitable species tracking

SMC 20 6 2 expand, 3 no change, 1 contract 0.01 0.19 0.67

URB 3 1 1 no change NA NA NA

VOW 11 7 3 expand, 4 no change 0.09 0.94 0.36

VRI 12 0 -- 0.02 0.22 0.65

WFR 18 4 4 contract 0.01 0.17 0.68

WTM 16 3 3 contract 0.09 1.44 0.25

113

114

115 Table A6.2. Changes in species’ and each suitable vegetation type lower range limit range change.

Number of species for which Number of Type of species R2 F-value P-value

vegetation type is suitable species tracking

AGS 16 0 -- 0.07 1.05 0.32

ASC 9 3 1 expand, 2 contract 0.06 0.43 0.53

ASP 10 7 7 contract 0.11 0.99 0.35

BAR 3 0 -- NA NA NA

BOP 11 0 -- 0.05 0.49 0.50

BOW 11 0 -- 0.03 0.27 0.62

CPC 5 0 -- 0.26 1.07 0.38

CRC 8 2 2 no change 0.44 4.72 0.07

DFR 12 6 1 expand, 1 no change, 4 contract 0.11 1.20 0.30

EPN 14 1 1 no change 0.007 0.08 0.77

FEW 7 2 2 expand 0.0003 0.0013 0.97

JPN 14 7 7 contract 0.22 3.31 0.09

JUN 10 5 1 expand, 4 contract 0.004 0.03 0.86

Number of species for which Number of Type of species R2 F-value P-value

vegetation type is suitable species tracking

LAC 1 0 -- NA NA NA

LPN 13 0 -- NA NA NA

LSG 9 1 1 no change 0.08 0.64 0.45

MCH 18 8 2 expand, 6 contract 0.02 0,28 0,60

MCP 18 9 2 expand, 7 contract 0.002 0.02 0.90

MHC 15 3 1 expand, 2 no change 0.06 0.76 0.40

MHW 12 0 -- 0.02 0.19 0.67

MRI 19 0 -- 0.06 1.12 0.30

PJN 10 0 -- 0.14 1.35 0.28

PPN 15 4 2 expand, 2 no change 0.27 4.69 0.05

RFR 14 7 7 contract 0.44 9.5 0.009

SCN 15 2 1 expand, 1 no change <0.001 0.0003 0.99

SGB 15 8 2 expand, 6 contract 0.15 2.22 0.16

SMC 20 4 2 expand, 2 no change 0.06 1.14 0.30

Number of species for which Number of Type of species R2 F-value P-value

vegetation type is suitable species tracking

URB 3 0 -- NA NA NA

VOW 11 0 -- 0.03 0.27 0.62

VRI 12 2 2 expand 0.45 8.05 0.02

WFR 18 8 1 expand, 7 contract 0.03 0.54 0.47

WTM 16 6 1 expand, 5 contract 0007 0.11 0.75

116

117

118 (a) (b)

119 (c) (d)

120 (e) (f)

121 (g) (h)

122 (i) (j)

123 (k) (l)

124 (m) (n)

125 (o) (p)

126 (q) (r)

127 (s) (t)

128 (u) (v)

129 (w) (x)

130 (y) (z)

131 (aa) (bb)

132 (cc) (dd)

133 (ee) (ff)

134 (gg) (hh)

135 (ii) (jj)

136 (kk) (ll)

137 (mm) (nn)

138 (oo) (pp)

139 (qq) (rr)

140 (ss) (tt)

141 (uu) (vv)

142 (ww) (xx)

143 (yy) (zz)

144 (aaa) (bbb)

145 (ccc) (ddd)

146 (eee) (fff)

147 (ggg) (hhh)

148 (iii) (jjj)

149 Figure A6.1. Changes in species’ and per suitable vegetation type upper (left graphs) and lower

150 (right graphs) range limit change.

151