Effects of changing climate on the demography of the Karner blue butterfly: Progress summary

1. Effects of changing climate on the demography of the Karner blue butterfly:Progress summary NPS Climate change response grant A joint collaboration between NPS, USGS, University of Notre Dame

2. PROJECT OVERVIEW DEMOGRAPHY NICHE MODELING • Temp treatments • Snow cover treatments • Predation/parasitism • Lupine phenology • Range-wide • Population-specific MICROCLIMATE POP. GENETICS • Genetic diversity and variation • What is a “population”? • Map Kbb, lupine, and microclimate at INDU

3. PROJECT OVERVIEW DEMOGRAPHY NICHE MODELING • Temp treatments • Snow cover treatments • Predation/parasitism • Lupine phenology • Range-wide • Population-specific MICROCLIMATE POP. GENETICS • Genetic diversity and variation • What is a “population”? • Map Kbb, lupine, and microclimate at INDU

4. DEMOGRAPHY TEMPERATURE TREATMENTS ~160 diapausingKbb eggs (2010 2nd flight) per treatment

7. Treatment Cohort Demography *Did not reach pupation

8. 9C Degree Day Model

9. 12C Degree Day Model

10. Adult Mass vs. 9C DD Scatter plot First Flight Second Flight

11. Adult Mass vs. 12C DDScatter plot First Flight Second Flight

12. Adult Mass by SexANOVA First Flight Second Flight

13. Days to PupationANOVA First Flight Second Flight

14. Days to PupationANOVA First Flight Second Flight

15. .Ecological Niche Modeling. Land cover Temperature Precipitation

16. .Ecological Niche Modeling. Land cover Temperature Precipitation

17. .Historic Range. • Historic range: NH/ME to MN • Since extirpated: • IL, MA, NJ, PA, ME, and Ontario

18. .Occurrence Data.

19. .Environmental Layers. • BIOCLIM variables • Canadian Centre for Climate Modeling Analysis (CCCMA). Current and A2 scenario (2080) • Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) land cover • Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) vegetation continuous fields • IPCC Major Soil Classifications

20. .Algorithm Comparisons. .OM-GARP (Current).

21. .Algorithm Comparisons. • GARP depicts more complete historic range • MaxEnt probability threshhold lower .OM-GARP (Current). .MaxEnt (Current).

22. .Algorithm Comparisons. OM-GARP (2080)

23. .Algorithm Comparisons. .OM-GARP (Current). .MaxEnt (Current). OM-GARP (2080) .MaxEnt (2080).

24. .Algorithm Comparisons. OM-GARP (2080) .MaxEnt (2080). 1. Similar complete displacement 2. Working on sub-pupulation GARP models a. NY/IN complete suitability issues

25. .Research Questions. • 1. Assessing the potential of local adaptation-do different Karner sub-populations fill different climatic niches? • Sub-population-specific approach to modeling • 2. Are ecological niche models capable of capturing local adaptation within a range-wide data set?

26. .Cluster Analysis. • Obtained values for each BIOCLIM variable at each occurrence point • PCA scatter plot-cluster?

27. .PCA Scatter. • PC1=65.3% • PC2=14.6% PC2: (Max Temp of Warmest Quarter, Mean Temp of Wettest Quarter) PC1: (Mean Temp of Driest Quarter, Temp Seasonality)

28. .Preliminary Conclusions. • Question 1: Do different Karner sub-populations fill different climatic niches? Different Optimal Conditions Different Response Variables Lack of Geographic Overlap Climatic Variation

29. .Preliminary Conclusions. • Question 2: Are ecological niche models capable of capturing local adaptation within a range-wide data set? Yes Limitation

30. .Implications. • Ecological niche range-wide outputs for fragmented ranges analyzed with caution • Management efforts: • Need for sub-population specific management plans • Placement of recovery units in areas with similar to origin climate envelopes