Distribution, habitat and vulnerability to climate change of the Endangered Leptopelis xenodactylus

References

• Anderson RP. 2012. Harnessing the world’s biodiversity data: promise and peril in ecological niche modeling of species distributions. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1260:66–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06440.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armstrong AJ. 2001. Conservation status of herpetofauna endemic to KwaZulu-Natal. J Herpetol. 50:79–96.
   Google Scholar
• Ashcroft MB. 2010. Identifying refugia from climate change. J Biogeogr. 37:1407–1413.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Botts EA, Erasmus BFN, Alexander GJ. 2015. Observed range dynamics of South African amphibians under conditions of global change. Austral Ecol. 40:309–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.12215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cordier JM, Lescano JN, Rios N, Leynaud GC, Nori J. 2020. Climate change threatens micro-endemic amphibians of an important South American high-altitude center of endemism. Amphibia-Reptilia. 41(2):233–243. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685381-20191235
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson TP, Jackson ST, House JI, Prentice IC, Mace GM. 2011. Beyond Predictions: Biodiversity Conservation in a Changing Climate. Science. 332:53–58. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1200303
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Baan L, Alkemade R, Koellner T. 2013. Land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA: a global approach. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 18:1216–1230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0412-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• du Preez LH, Carruthers VC. 2017. Frogs of Southern Africa. Cape Town: Struik Nature
   Google Scholar
• Eastman JR. 1999. Idrisi 32 guide to GIS and image processing. Worcester, USA: Clark University.
   Google Scholar
• Elith J, Phillips SJ, Hastie T, Dudik M, En Chee Y, Yates CJ. 2011. A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers Distrib. 17:43–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00725.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. 2014a. KwaZulu-Natal Average Summer Monthly Means of Daily Maximum Temperature (W31) [Derived from South African Atlas of Climatology and Agrohydrology 2006], Resampled to E KZN W 2008v2 Land Cover Parameters – 2014 Modelling Suite. Unpublished GIS Coverage [AVSUM_MNDMAXTEMP_06_20M_W31_9999.zip]. Pietermaritzburg: Conservation Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. 2014b. KwaZulu-Natal Average Summer Median Monthly Rainfall (W31) [Derived from South African Atlas of Climatology and Agrohydrology 2006], Resampled to E KZN W 2008v2 Land Cover Parameters – 2014 Modelling Suite. Unpublished GIS Coverage [avsumpotevap_20m_w31_9999.zip]. Pietermaritzburg: Conservation Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. 2014c. KwaZulu-Natal Average Summer Monthly Means of Daily Average Relative Humidity (W31) [Derived from South African Atlas of Climatology and Agrohydrology 2006], Resampled to E KZN W 2008v2 Land Cover Parameters – 2014 Modelling Suite. Unpublished GIS Coverage [AVSUM_MNDAVRH_06_20M_W31_9999.zip]. Pietermaritzburg: Conservation Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. 2014d. KwaZulu-Natal Average Summer Potential Evaporation (W31) [Derived from South African Atlas of Climatology and Agrohydrology 2006], Resampled to E KZN W 2008v2 Land Cover Parameters – 2014 Modelling Suite. Unpublished GIS Coverage [avsumpotevap_20m_w31_9999.zip]. Pietermaritzburg: Conservation Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. 2014e. KwaZulu-Natal Plant available water (W31) [Derived from South African Atlas of Climatology and Agrohydrology 2006], Resampled to E KZN W 2008v2 Land Cover Parameters – 2014 Modelling Suite. Unpublished GIS Coverage [avsumpotevap_20m_w31_9999.zip]. Pietermaritzburg: Conservation Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. 2015a. KwaZulu-Natal Landform [Derived from modified 30 m SRTM DEM], Resampled to E KZN W 2008v2 Land Cover Parameters – 2014 Modelling Suite. Unpublished GIS Coverage [lf830_20m_w31_9999.zip]. Pietermaritzburg: Conservation Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. 2015b. KwaZulu-Natal Projected Modified 30 m SRTM DEM (W31) [Derived from DEM sourced from U.S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior/USGS], Resampled to E KZN W 2008v2 Land Cover Parameters - 2014 Modelling Suite. Unpublished GIS Coverage [SRTM30m_DEM_20m_v2_w31_9999]. Pietermaritzburg: Conservation Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife 2020. KZN Modification Surface – Leptopelis xenodactylus (W31) [Derived from Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife & GEOTERRA Image KZN Land-cover 2017v1], Reclassed & Projected to w31. Unpublished GIS Coverage [KZN_EQV17V1_MOD_LepXen_W31_BF20M_9999.zip]. Pietermaritzburg: Conservation Services, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Foden WB, Butchart SHM, Stuart SN, Vié J-C, Akçakaya HR, Angulo A et al. 2013. Identifying the World’s Most Climate Change Vulnerable Species: A Systematic Trait-Based Assessment of all Birds, Amphibians and Corals. PLoS ONE. 8 e65427. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065427
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grenfell MC, Ellery WN, Grenfell SE. 2009. Valley morphology and sediment cascades within a wetland system in the KwaZulu-Natal Drakensberg Foothills, eastern South Africa. Earth Surf Process Landf. 33:2029–2044. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1652
   Google Scholar
• IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee. 2022. Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 15.1. Standards and Petitions Committee. https://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/RedListGuidelines.pdf
   Google Scholar
• IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group, South African Frog Re-assessment Group (SA-FRoG). 2017. Leptopelis xenodactylus The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017:e.T11700A77163657. http://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-2.RLTS.T11700A77163657.en
   Google Scholar
• Jewitt D. 2018. Vegetation type conservation targets, status and level of protection in KwaZulu-Natal in 2016. Bothalia. 48:a2294. https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v48i1.2294
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jewitt D, Erasmus BFN, Goodman PS, O’Connor TG, Hargrove WW, Maddalena DM. 2015a. Climate-induced change of environmentally defined floristic domains: A conservation based vulnerability framework. Appl Geogr. 63:33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.06.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jewitt D, Goodman PS, Erasmus BFN, O’Connor TG, Witkowski ETF. 2015b. Systematic land-cover change in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: Implications for biodiversity. SA J Sci. 111:2015–0019. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2015/20150019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Junior PDM, Nobrega CC. 2018. Evaluating collinearity effects on species distribution models: An approach based on virtual species simulation. PLoS ONE. 13:e0202403. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202403
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Cohen JM, Rohr JR. 2013. Review and synthesis of the effects of climate change on amphibians. Intergr Zool. 8:145–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/1749-4877.12001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mawdsley JR, O’Malley R, Ojima DS. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptation Strategies for Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conserv Biol. 23:1080-1089. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayani-Paras F, Botello F, Castaneda S, Sanches-Cordero V. 2019. Impact of Habitat Loss and Mining on the Distribution of Endemic Species of Amphibians and Reptiles in Mexico. Diversity 11:210. https://doi.org/10.3390/d11110210
   Google Scholar
• Merow C, Smith MJ, Silander JA. 2013. A practical guide to MaxEnt for modeling species’ distributions: what it does, and why inputs and settings matter. Ecography. 36:1058–1069. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2013.07872.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minter LR, Burger M, Harrison J, Braack H, Bishop PJ, Kloepfer D. 2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Mittermeier RA, Gil PR, Hoffman M, Pilgrim J, Brooks T, Mittermeier CG et al. 2005. Hotspots Revisited: Earth’s biologically richest and most endangered ecoregions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morales NS, Fernandez IC, Baca-Gonzalez V. 2017. MaxEnt’s parameter configuration and small samples: are we paying attention to recommendations? A systematic review. PeerJ. 5:e3093. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3093
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mucina L, Rutherford MC. 2006. The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Pretoria, South Africa: South African National Biodiversity Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Ortega-Andrade HM, Rodes Blanco M, Cisneros-Heredia DF, Guerra Arévalo N, López De Vargas-Machuca KG, Sánchez-Nivicela JC et al. 2021. Red List assessment of amphibian species of Ecuador: A multidimensional approach for their conservation. PLoS ONE. 16:e0251027. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson AT. 2001. Predicting species’ geographic distributions based on ecological niche modeling. Condor. 103:599–605. https://doi.org/10.1093/condor/103.3.599
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson AT, Soberón J. 2012. Species distribution modeling and ecological niche modeling: Getting the concepts right. Nat Conserv. 10:1–6. https://doi.org/10.4322/natcon.2012.019
   Google Scholar
• Peterson AT, Soberón J, Pearson RG, Anderson RP, Martínez-Meyer E, Nakamura M, Araújo MB. 2011. Ecological niches and geographic distributions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE. 2006. Maximum entropy modelling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model. 190:231–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.03.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips SJ, Dudik M. 2008. Modeling of species distributions with MaxEnt: New extensions and a comprehensive evaluation. Ecography. 31:161–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0906-7590.2008.5203.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Republic of South Africa. 2013. Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act, 5 August, Government Gazette Vol. 578, No. 36730.
   Google Scholar
• Republic of South Africa. 2021. Environmental Screening Tool of the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment. https://screening.environment.gov.za/screeningtool/#/pages/welcome
   Google Scholar
• Schulze RE. 2006. South African Atlas of Climatology and Agrohydrology. Pretoria, South Africa: Pretoria Water Research Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Scott-Shaw CR, Escott BJ (Editors). 2011. KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Pre-Transformation Vegetation Type Map – 2011 v2.4, Rasterized to E KZN W 2008v2 Land Cover Parameters - 2014 Modelling Suite. Unpublished GIS Coverage [kznveg05v2_4_11_inhouse_w31_03022020_20m_9999.zip]. Pietermaritzburg: Biodiversity Conservation Planning Division, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife.
   Google Scholar
• Simoes M, Romero-Álvares D, Nunez-Penichet C, Jiménez LJ, Cobos ME. 2020. General theory and good practices in ecological niche modeling: A basic guide. Biodivers Inform. 15:67–68. Haste
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutherland WJ, Dicks LV, Ockendon N, Petrovan SO, Smith RK. 2019. What Works in Conservation. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Tarrant J, Armstrong AJ. 2013. Using predictive modelling to guide the conservation of a critically endangered coastal wetland amphibian. J Nat Conserv. 21:369–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2013.03.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren DL. 2012. In defense of ‘niche modeling’. Trends Ecol Evol. 27:497–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.03.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar