Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Classification of habitats included in the assessment.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Sensitivity attributes.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Exposure factors.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Data quality matrix.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Logic rule for calculating climate exposure and sensitivity for each habitat type.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Fig 1.

Overall climate vulnerability matrix.

Overall climate vulnerability rank is denoted by color: low (green), moderate (yellow), high (orange), and very high (red). Mar = Marine; Est = Estuarine; Riv = Riverine. Categorical ranks used for overall habitat vulnerability in the matrix, and order within each vulnerability cell based on bootstrap rank. Borderline cases from bootstrap results indicated with bold and italics: bold ≥0.25 probability that the habitat’s vulnerability rank is one rank higher than the categorical rank; italics ≥0.25 probability that the habitat’s vulnerability rank is one rank lower than the categorical rank; *bootstrap analysis found the greatest probability that the habitat’s vulnerability rank is one rank lower than the categorical rank; **bootstrap analysis found the greatest probability that the habitat’s vulnerability rank is one rank higher than the categorical rank.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Climate vulnerability in the marine, estuarine, and riverine systems.

Number of habitats in the marine (A), estuarine (B), and riverine (C) systems with low, moderate, high, and very high vulnerability ranks. Certainty in rank is denoted by text font and text color: very high certainty (>95%, black font), high certainty (90–95%, black, italic font), moderate certainty (66–90%, white font), low certainty (<66%, white, italic font).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Relative climate vulnerability by category.

Proportion of habitats in each category with low, moderate, high, and very high vulnerability ranks.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 6.

Supplemental riverine analysis.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Fig 4.

Sensitivity attributes.

Results of sensitivity analysis for the influence of individual sensitivity attributes on overall vulnerability rank (A) and mean sensitivity scores across all habitats [boxes represent median and interquartile range (IQR), whiskers are values within 1.5*IQR, and points are potential outliers] (B).

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Exposure factors.

Results of sensitivity analysis for the influence of individual exposure factors on overall vulnerability rank (A) and mean exposure scores across all habitats (boxes represent median and interquartile range (IQR), whiskers are values within 1.5*IQR, and points are potential outliers) (B). All four Temperature exposure factors (Air, Surface, Bottom, River) were analyzed together in the sensitivity analysis, since only one temperature exposure factor was scored for each habitat. The same was done for the two Salinity exposure factors (Surface, Bottom).

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Direction of climate effect by system.

Proportion of habitats in each system expected to be positively, neutrally, and negatively affected by climate change.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Direction of climate effect by category.

Number of habitats in each category expected to be positively, neutrally, and negatively affected by climate change.

More »

Fig 7 Expand