Fig 1.
Pinus hartwegii current geographic distribution (shaded areas) and occurrence point used in the construction of its climate niche model (dots show).
Fig 2.
Potential current distribution models of P. hartwegii were constructed with the five main components that accumulate 95.77% of the data variation, generated by four algorithms: GBM, RF, SVM, and MaxEnt.
Fig 3.
Principal components analysis of the environmental variables and altitude used in the modeling process of P. hartwegii.
The symbol “★” indicates the nine variables that further limit the niche breadth.
Fig 4.
Cumulative frequencies of the bioclimatic variables associated with the niche breadth of P. hartwegii. Records within the intervals of each bioclimatic variables: a) mean annual temperature (Bio1); b) isothermality (Bio3); c) mean annual temperature range (Bio7); d) mean driest quarter temperature (Bio9); e) mean warmest quarter temperature (Bio10); f) mean coldest quarter temperature (Bio11); and g) coldest quarter precipitation (Bio19).
Fig 5.
Niche breadth of P. hartwegii represented with two bioclimatic variables that provides the most information according to Jackknife analysis: The temperature of the warmest quarter (Bio10) and the precipitation of the coldest quarter (Bio19).
Table 1.
Bioclimatic variables and their percent contributions associated with the niche breadth of P. hartwegii according to Jackknife analysis.
Table 2.
Validation by calculating the partial ROC of models generated by four algorithms used.
Area under the curve (AUC) and Standard deviation (SD) values are showed for each algorithm.
Fig 6.
Climate niche model of P. hartwegii for 2050.
Models comparing three general circulation models used MIROC-ES-CHEM, CCSM4, and HadGEM2-ES in combination with the two Relative Concentration Pathways used RCP's 2.6 and 8.5 for the horizon 2050.
Fig 7.
Climate niche model of P. hartwegii for 2070.
Models comparing three general circulation models used MIROC-ES-CHEM, CCSM4, and HadGEM2-ES in combination with the two Relative Concentration Pathways used RCP's 2.6 and 8.5 for the horizon 2070.
Table 3.
Comparison between the suitability areas estimated by the current and future different general circulation models (GCM) for two Relative Concentration Pathways (RCP's) used for 2050.
Table 4.
Comparison between the suitability areas estimated by the current and future different general circulation models (GCM) for two Relative Concentration Pathways (RCP's) used for 2070.