Vertebrates do not display consistent declines in abundance or stability with contemporary range or realized climate niche centrality

Abstract

The abundant-centre (ACH) and stable-centre hypotheses (SCH) predict population abundance and stability decline with increasing distances from a species' range and multivariate climate niche centres. ACH and SCH are widely held assumptions underpinning many ecological and conservation applications, with range and climate centrality often assumed to reflect suitability. However, empirical support that abundance (distance-abundance) and stability (distance-variability) decline away from range and climate centres is mixed and hampered by radically different climate centrality assumptions. Here, we test distance-abundance relationships in >5000 vertebrate species and distance-variability relationships in >1000 vertebrate species across their realized geographic and climate niche spaces. We found no vertebrate taxa display consistent declines in abundance or stability with increasing distances from range centres or realized climate (niche) centres modelled from species' breeding ranges, native ranges or contemporary occurrences. Distance-abundance and distance-variability relationships were weak and inconsistent across taxa irrespective of centrality metric, modelling approach, climate variables, abundance metric or dataset. Contemporary vertebrate abundance patterns, therefore, are often decoupled from position in contemporary range and realized climate space, challenging a central assumption of core-periphery models. Broadly, our study indicates that frequently used range and climate centrality metrics may be weak predictors of vertebrate abundance patterns in contemporary landscapes and biological forecasting or climate change applications should be cautious of their unvalidated use.