Hostname: page-component-75d7c8f48-hfkw9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-14T13:59:23.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Climate change associated with local extinction in peripheral populations of the threatened Italian endemic plant Santolina etrusca (Asteraceae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2026

Lorenzo Peruzzi*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Biologia, University of Pisa, Italy
David Dolci
Affiliation:
BIOME Lab, Department of Biological, Geological & Environmental Sciences, University of Bologna, Italy
Paola De Giorgi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Biologia, University of Pisa, Italy
Antonio Giacò
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Biologia, University of Pisa, Italy
Alessandro Chiarucci
Affiliation:
BIOME Lab, Department of Biological, Geological & Environmental Sciences, University of Bologna, Italy
*
Corresponding author: Lorenzo Peruzzi; Email: lorenzo.peruzzi@unipi.it
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The role of climate change as a driver of local extinctions has rarely been tested using primary distribution data, largely due to the scarcity of such data for many species, especially from historical periods. Santolina etrusca (Asteraceae), an Italian endemic shrub listed as Near Threatened on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Red List of Threatened Species, is a notable exception, as both historical and current distributional data are available for it. In this study, we documented the distribution changes of this species, highlighting the local extinction of populations located in the northernmost and southernmost edges of its historical range during the twentieth century. Direct anthropogenic impacts on land use are unlikely to have been the primary causes of local extinctions, although the absence of historical data prevents us from ruling out past anthropogenic drivers. By analysing the ecological conditions at sites hosting extinct versus extant populations, we identified significant climatic factors that are potentially responsible for this range contraction. Our findings provide empirical evidence of an association between climate change and local extinctions in a Mediterranean plant, suggesting that greater temperature seasonality, continentality and annual temperature range are linked to range contraction.

Information

Type
Report
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - SA
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is used to distribute the re-used or adapted article and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press or the rights holder(s) must be obtained prior to any commercial use.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Foundation for Environmental Conservation

Introduction

The extinction of animals and plants in the wild is a natural process (Raup Reference Raup1986). Under natural conditions, extinction rates are generally balanced by speciation, which maintains or increases global species diversity. However, given the exceptionally high extinction rates observed today, many researchers agree that Earth is entering a sixth mass extinction (Barnosky et al. Reference Barnosky, Matzke, Tomiya, Wogan, Swartz and Quental2011, Veron et al. Reference Veron, Clergeau and Pavoine2016). Between 1900 and 2018, the extinction rate of seed plants exceeded the natural turnover of species, and it was even higher than the rate recorded between 1753 and 1900 (Humphreys et al. Reference Humphreys, Govaerts, Ficinski, Nic Lughadha and Vorontsova2019). Major anthropogenic threats to biodiversity include habitat fragmentation and loss, overexploitation, the spread of pathogens, competition from alien species and climate change (Tilman et al. Reference Tilman, Clark, Williams, Kimmel, Polasky and Packer2017), with the latter recognized as a key driver of global biodiversity loss (Bellard et al. Reference Bellard, Bertelsmeier, Leadley, Thuiller and Courchamp2012). Shifts in environmental conditions can cause a mismatch between the ecological niche of a species and its current geographical distribution, forcing populations to migrate, adapt to the new conditions or face extinction (Davis & Shaw Reference Davis and Shaw2001). In this context, populations occurring at the edges of the range of a species may be particularly vulnerable and potentially affected by even moderate climatic shifts (Wiens Reference Wiens2016).

Many studies have investigated extinction risk in relation to climate change, predicting threats to global biodiversity (Thomas et al. Reference Thomas, Cameron, Green, Bakkenes, Beaumont and Collingham2004, Araújo et al. Reference Araújo, Thuiller and Pearson2006). Most of this research has focused on broad-scale patterns and on forecasting the potential future impacts of ongoing climatic trends. Numerous effects on wild species have been well documented (Kosanic et al. Reference Kosanic, Anderson, Harrison, Turkington and Bennie2018, Renner & Zohner Reference Renner and Zohner2018). However, the direct role of climate change in driving documented extinctions has only rarely been demonstrated empirically (Buse et al. Reference Buse, Boch, Hilgers and Griebeler2015).

Etruscan cotton lavender, Santolina etrusca (Asteraceae), provides a particularly suitable case study, given its limited dispersal ability (Angiolini Reference Angiolini2001) and the potential susceptibility of some related Santolina species to climate change (Varaldo et al. Reference Varaldo, Dagnino, Guerrina, Minuto and Casazza2021). This Italian endemic aromatic shrub historically exhibited a disjunct, bipolar distribution: a northern group of populations along the Lima and Arno rivers; and a southern group including Mount Amiata and surrounding areas, the Maremma area, the Orcia and Paglia valleys, the Tuscia and a small area near Orvieto (Siena, Grosseto, Viterbo and Terni provinces; Figure 1; Angiolini Reference Angiolini2001, Giacò et al. Reference Giacò, De Giorgi, Astuti, Varaldo, Minuto and Peruzzi2022). This species has undergone local extinctions of peripheral populations over the past century (Angiolini Reference Angiolini2001, Giacò et al. Reference Giacò, De Giorgi, Astuti, Varaldo, Minuto and Peruzzi2022) and has been assessed as Near Threatened, primarily due to presumed links of these local extinctions to human activity (Orsenigo et al. Reference Orsenigo, Montagnani, Fenu, Gargano, Peruzzi and Abeli2018). This is based on the distributional study by Angiolini (Reference Angiolini2001), who noted that most northern populations occurred on stony-pebble riverbanks, hypothesizing that this peculiar habitat type may have been lost – at least in some cases – following dam constructions. However, no evidence of human-induced habitat alteration has been provided to substantiate this assumption. Angiolini (Reference Angiolini2001) also suggested a correlation between dispersal and watercourses based on the absence of a pappus on the cypselae; yet the species typically occurs in arid, stony habitats on plains at between 100 and 1,000 m of elevation (Pignatti Reference Pignatti2018). For these reasons, we hypothesize that recent climate change may have acted as a possible driver of these local extinctions. To evaluate whether the disappearance of peripheral populations can be explained by climatic factors, we compared the climatic conditions of sites with extinct versus extant populations. Additionally, to disentangle potential contributions of human-induced habitat change, we carried out a comparative analysis of land use. Specifically, we aimed to address two questions: (1) are there significant differences in land-use patterns and present-day climatic conditions between sites currently occupied by S. etrusca and those where the species has historically gone extinct? And (2) were these climatic differences already present prior to the local extinctions?

Figure 1. Extinct (red) and extant (blue) populations of Santolina etrusca.

Materials and methods

Occurrence, land-cover and climate data

Historical and current distribution data for S. etrusca were gathered from herbarium specimens, the literature and field observations stored in Wikiplantbase #Italia (Peruzzi et al. Reference Peruzzi, Roma-Marzio, Pinzani and Bedini2019 onwards; see also Angiolini Reference Angiolini2001, Giacò et al. Reference Giacò, De Giorgi, Astuti, Varaldo, Minuto and Peruzzi2022). A total of 110 distribution records were retrieved and filtered to retain only one occurrence per 1 × 1 km grid cell. After filtering, 83 grid cells remained, including 15 representing extinct populations and 68 representing extant populations (Figure 1).

Land-cover data for Italy (updated to 2018) were downloaded from the Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (Istituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale; ISPRA) database (www.isprambiente.gov.it). The dataset is provided as a raster layer with 18 land-cover categories at c. 10 m2 spatial resolution (Table S1).

Mean monthly climatic time series were obtained from the CHELSAcruts database (Krager et al. Reference Karger, Conrad, Böhner, Kawohl, Kreft and Soria-Auza2017) at ∼1 km2 spatial resolution. Following Dolci and Peruzzi (Reference Dolci and Peruzzi2022), the ‘modern’ climate period corresponds to 1981–2010, whereas the ‘historical’ climate period corresponds to 1901–1930. These raw climatic time series were used to compute 35 derived climate variables describing local climate conditions (Table S2; O’Donnell & Ignizio Reference O’Donnell and Ignizio2012, Title & Bemmels Reference Title and Bemmels2018). Derived variables were calculated using the R packages dismo and envirem (Hijmans et al. Reference Hijmans, Phillips, Leathwick, Elith and Hijmans2017, Title & Bemmels Reference Title and Bemmels2018).

Data analysis

To disentangle the relative contributions of human activities and climatic factors to local extinctions of S. etrusca, we used the non-parametric Mann–Whitney U-test (α ≤ 0.01) to compare both climatic variables and land-cover categories between sites of extinct and extant populations. This test was chosen for its robustness with unequal sample sizes (MacFarland & Yates Reference MacFarland and Yates2016). For each occurrence site, geographical coordinates were used to extract climatic variable values and to calculate the percentage of each land-use class within the corresponding 1-km2 grid cell. These extracted values were then compared between extinct and extant populations. For climatic data, comparisons were first conducted using modern climate variables. To control for multiple testing, p-values were adjusted using the Benjamini–Hochberg false discovery rate correction (Benjamini & Hochberg Reference Benjamini and Hochberg1995). Variables that remained significant after correction (adjusted p ≤ 0.01) were subsequently examined using a biplot principal component analysis (PCA) to assess collinearity and to identify groups of highly correlated variables. From each correlated group, a single representative, biologically meaningful variable was retained to avoid redundancy. This reduced set of variables was then used to compare historical climatic conditions between extinct and extant populations, enabling direct temporal comparisons of the same climatic predictors.

Results

Among the 18 land-cover categories, 14 were shared by extinct and extant populations (Tables 1 & S1), whereas ‘Agroforestry Use’ was exclusive to extant sites. Of all land-cover classes, only ‘Transport and Logistic Use’ showed a significant difference between groups (p = 2.4 × 10–3). On average, this category occupied c. 7% (standard deviation: ±3.6) of the area of grid cells with extinct populations and 4.3% (standard deviation: ±3.8) of the area of cells with extant populations.

Table 1. Comparison of land-cover categories shared between extinct and extant Santolina etrusca populations: number of cells classified as extinct or extant for each land-cover category, along with the average percentage (± standard deviation (SD)) of each class within extinct and extant populations.

Statistically significant differences were detected for 11 out of the 35 modern climatic variables (Table 2). The PCA biplot (Figure 2) highlighted an overall difference between extant and extinct sites in terms of climatic conditions. Four distinct clusters of highly correlated variables were identified, and one representative variable from each cluster was retained for further analyses of historical climatic conditions. Three of the four retained variables showed statistically significant differences between extinct and extant sites (Figure 3 & Table 2): ‘Climatic Moisture Index’, representing a group highly correlated with ‘Annual Precipitation’, ‘Precipitation of the Wettest Month’ and ‘Precipitation of the Wettest Quarter’; ‘Precipitation of the Driest Quarter’, correlated with ‘Precipitation of the Driest Month’ and ‘Precipitation of the Warmest Quarter’; and ‘Temperature Seasonality’, correlated with ‘Continentality’ and ‘Temperature Annual Range’.

Table 2. List of modern climatic indices showing statistically significant differences between sites with extinct and extant populations of Santolina etrusca, detected through Mann–Whitney U-tests with Benjamini–Hochberg adjusted p-values ≤ 0.01. Variables retained after the principal component analysis are shown in bold.

NS = non-significant; PET = potential evapotranspiration; SD = standard deviation.

Figure 2. Biplot of the principal component analysis (PCA) of modern climatic conditions at sites with extant (blue) and extinct (red) populations of Santolina etrusca. Points represent the sites. The 95% confidence ellipses depict the climatic niche occupied by each group. BIO4 = Temperature Seasonality; BIO7 = Temperature Annual Range; BIO12 = Annual Precipitation; BIO13 = Precipitation of Wettest Month; BIO14 = Precipitation of Driest Month; BIO16 = Precipitation of Wettest Quarter; BIO17 = Precipitation of Driest Quarter; BIO18 = Precipitation of Warmest Quarter; VAR3 = Climatic Moisture Index; VAR4 = Continentality; VAR11 = Potential Evapotranspiration Coldest Quarter.

Figure 3. Violin plots illustrating the comparison of historical (1901–1930) and modern (1980–2010) climatic variables at sites of Santolina etrusca occurrence. Climatic values from extinct sites are in red, whereas climate values from extant sites are in blue. PET = potential evapotranspiration.

Discussion

A direct anthropogenic impact can seemingly be excluded as the primary cause of local extinctions of S. etrusca, given the absence of substantial differences in present-day land use between extinct and extant sites of S. etrusca (Table 2). However, a limitation of this analysis lies in the spatial grain (c. 1 × 1 km), which may not capture localized, fine-scale habitat alterations. Thus, we cannot rule out that such fine-scale habitat modifications, untested in our study, may represent additional potential drivers – or accelerators – of local extinction. Another limitation of our study is that only present-day land-use data were available; therefore, we cannot rule out past anthropogenic drivers.

Despite this, our results clearly indicate significant climatic differences between extinct and extant sites, although our data could have benefitted from spatially aware cross-validation (Roberts et al. Reference Roberts, Bahn, Ciuti, Boyce, Elith and Guillera-Arroita2017). Overall, areas where extinct populations once occurred exhibit a less characteristically Mediterranean climate. Temperature Seasonality, along with the highly correlated variables Continentality and Annual Temperature Range, show higher values in these sites (Figure 2 & Table 2), indicating greater temperature fluctuations within a given locality (Oliver Reference Oliver2008, O’Donnell & Ignizio Reference O’Donnell and Ignizio2012). The Climate Moisture Index, reflecting the balance between annual precipitation and potential evapotranspiration (Oliver Reference Oliver2008, Title & Bemmels Reference Title and Bemmels2018), is also higher, pointing to overall wetter conditions. Similarly, potential evapotranspiration during the coldest quarter is lower, again indicating greater moisture availability at extinct sites.

Several studies have highlighted temperature seasonality as a key indicator of climate change (Thomson Reference Thomson1995, Braganza et al. Reference Braganza, Karoly, Hirst, Mann, Stott, Stouffer and Tett2003, Qian et al. Reference Qian, Fu and Wu2011, Feng et al. Reference Feng, Qian and Materia2022) and have emphasized its influence on biological processes (Gremer et al. Reference Gremer, Andrews, Norris, Thomas, Munson, Duniway and Bradford2018, Qian et al. Reference Qian, Zhang, Ricklefs and Wang2022). Perennial species with Mediterranean affinities are generally expected to remain stable, or even expand, under climate change (Lavergne et al. Reference Lavergne, Molina and Debussche2006). This pattern appears consistent with the persistence of S. etrusca in its core Mediterranean range but not at the periphery, where sites exhibit less Mediterranean and more continental climatic characteristics.

These findings support the inference of a relationship between the range contraction of S. etrusca and climate change. Nevertheless, some variability exists among extinct sites. For example, the southernmost site in Lazio (Monterotondo) shares more climatic similarities with extant sites, suggesting that extinction there was probably driven by factors other than climate.

Importantly, most of the climatic differences between extinct and extant sites were already present during the period 1901–1930 (Figure 3 & Table 2), namely before the documented extinctions of S. etrusca, and they may have contributed to triggering these events.

This case study suggests that climate change may have already affected Mediterranean flora over the last century, possibly driving the loss of populations at the margins of species’ ranges. Unfortunately, it is plausible that S. etrusca, along with other Mediterranean species with similar ecological traits, will experience further local extinctions under ongoing climatic shifts. Future projections predict a continued increase in temperature seasonality across the Mediterranean region (Feng et al. Reference Feng, Qian and Materia2022), driven by the so-called Mediterranean amplification (Brogli et al. Reference Brogli, Sørland, Kröner and Schär2019), a phenomenon in which summer warming exceeds that of most other regions worldwide (Qian & Zhang 2015) and surpasses the average warming of the Northern Hemisphere (Lionello & Scarascia Reference Lionello and Scarascia2018). Moreover, the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report (Pörtner et al. Reference Pörtner, Roberts, Tignor, Poloczanska, Mintenbeck and Alegría2022, Tollefson Reference Tollefson2022) emphasized that climate change is advancing more rapidly than previously projected and is increasingly emerging as a global challenge.

Conclusions

The lack of substantial differences in current land uses between sites of local extinction and those where S. etrusca still occurs seemingly rules out direct anthropogenic impact as the primary cause of its disappearance. By contrast, the significant climatic differences observed between extinct and extant sites indicate that climate change is associated with the local extinctions of peripheral populations. The persistence of these same climatic differences since the early twentieth century suggests that, at the time when they were first recorded, the now-extinct populations of S. etrusca were already experiencing suboptimal climatic conditions.

Supplementary material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892926100332.

Availability of data and materials

Data available on request from the authors.

Acknowledgements

None.

Author contributions

LP conceived the idea and designed the research. PDG and AG curated the distribution data. DD and PDG performed all of the analyses and prepared the figures and tables. DD, PDG and AG drafted the first version of the manuscript. LP and AC contributed to successive versions of the manuscript.

Financial support

This work was supported by the Progetto di Ricerca di Rilevante Interesse Nazionale (PRIN; grant number 2017JW4HZK) and by the Italian Ministry of Universities and Research under the Department of Excellence 2023–2027 initiative. The project was funded under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), Mission 4 Component 2 Investment 1.4 – Call for tender No. 3138 of 16 December 2021, rectified by Decree n.3175 of 18 December 2021 of Italian Ministry of University and Research funded by the European Union – NextGenerationEU; Award Number: Project code CN_00000033, Concession Decree No. 1034 of 17 June 2022 adopted by the Italian Ministry of University and Research, CUP J33C22001190001, Project title ‘National Biodiversity Future Center NBFC’.

Competing interests

The authors declare none.

Ethical standards

Not applicable.

References

Angiolini, C (2001) Il pattern di distribuzione di Santolina etrusca (Lacaita) Marchi et D’Amato. Informatore Botanico Italiano 33: 351357.Google Scholar
Araújo, MB, Thuiller, W, Pearson, RG (2006) Climate warming and the decline of amphibians and reptiles in Europe. Journal of Biogeography 33: 17121728.10.1111/j.1365-2699.2006.01482.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnosky, AD, Matzke, N, Tomiya, S, Wogan, GO, Swartz, B, Quental, TB et al. (2011) Has the Earth’s sixth mass extinction already arrived? Nature 471: 5157.10.1038/nature09678CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bellard, C, Bertelsmeier, C, Leadley, P, Thuiller, W, Courchamp, F (2012) Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecology Letters 15: 365377.10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benjamini, Y, Hochberg, Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 57: 289300.10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braganza, K, Karoly, DJ, Hirst, AC, Mann, ME, Stott, P, Stouffer, RJ, Tett, SFB (2003) Simple indices of global climate variability and change: part I – variability and correlation structure. Climate Dynamics 20: 491502.10.1007/s00382-002-0286-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brogli, R, Sørland, SL, Kröner, N, Schär, C (2019) Causes of future Mediterranean precipitation decline depend on the season. Environmental Research Letters 14: 114017.10.1088/1748-9326/ab4438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buse, J, Boch, S, Hilgers, J, Griebeler, EM (2015) Conservation of threatened habitat types under future climate change – lessons from plant-distribution models and current extinction trends in southern Germany. Journal for Nature Conservation 27: 1825.10.1016/j.jnc.2015.06.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, MB, Shaw, RG (2001) Range shifts and adaptive responses to Quaternary climate change. Science 292: 673679.10.1126/science.292.5517.673CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dolci, D, Peruzzi, L (2022) Assessing the effectiveness of correlative ecological niche model temporal projection through floristic data. Biology 11: 1219.10.3390/biology11081219CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dormann, CF, Elith, J, Bacher, S, Buchmann, C, Carl, G, Carré, G et al. (2013) Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography 36: 2746.10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07348.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feng, X, Qian, C, Materia, S (2022) Amplification of the temperature seasonality in the Mediterranean region under anthropogenic climate change. Geophysical Research Letters 49: 2022GL099658.10.1029/2022GL099658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giacò, A, De Giorgi, P, Astuti, G, Varaldo, L, Minuto, L, Peruzzi, L (2022) Taxonomy and distribution of the genus Santolina (Asteraceae) in Italy. Biogeographia – The Journal of Integrative Biogeography 37: a021.10.21426/B637258322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gremer, JR, Andrews, C, Norris, JR, Thomas, LP, Munson, SM, Duniway, MC, Bradford, JB (2018) Increasing temperature seasonality may overwhelm shifts in soil moisture to favor shrub over grass dominance in Colorado Plateau drylands. Oecologia 188: 11951207.10.1007/s00442-018-4282-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hijmans, RJ, Phillips, S, Leathwick, J, Elith, J, Hijmans, MRJ (2017) dismo. R package version 1.1-4 [www document]. URL https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/dismo/index.html (accessed on 5 September 2022).Google Scholar
Humphreys, AM, Govaerts, R, Ficinski, SZ, Nic Lughadha, E, Vorontsova, MS (2019) Global dataset shows geography and life form predict modern plant extinction and rediscovery. Nature Ecology & Evolution 3: 10431047.10.1038/s41559-019-0906-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karger, DN, Conrad, O, Böhner, J, Kawohl, T, Kreft, H, Soria-Auza, RW et al. (2017) Climatologies at high resolution for the Earth’s land surface areas. Scientific Data 4: 120.10.1038/sdata.2017.122CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kosanic, A, Anderson, K, Harrison, S, Turkington, T, Bennie, J (2018) Changes in the geographical distribution of plant species and climatic variables on the West Cornwall peninsula (south west UK). PLoS ONE 13: e0191021.10.1371/journal.pone.0191021CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lavergne, S, Molina, J, Debussche, MAX (2006) Fingerprints of environmental change on the rare Mediterranean flora: a 115-year study. Global Change Biology 12: 14661478.10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01183.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leroy, B, Meynard, CN, Bellard, C, Courchamp, F (2016) virtualspecies, an R package to generate virtual species distributions. Ecography 39: 599607.10.1111/ecog.01388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lionello, P, Scarascia, L (2018) The relation between climate change in the Mediterranean region and global warming. Regional Environmental Change 18: 14811493.10.1007/s10113-018-1290-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacFarland, TW, Yates, JM (2016) Mann–Whitney U test. In: Introduction to Nonparametric Statistics for the Biological Sciences Using R (pp. 103132). Berlin, Germany: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-30634-6_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Donnell, MS, Ignizio, DA (2012) Bioclimatic predictors for supporting ecological applications in the conterminous United States. US Geological Survey Data Series 691: 49.Google Scholar
Oliver, JE (2008) Encyclopedia of World Climatology (pp. 365367). Berlin, Germany Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Orsenigo, S, Montagnani, C, Fenu, G, Gargano, D, Peruzzi, L, Abeli, T et al. (2018) Red Listing plants under full national responsibility: extinction risk and threats in the vascular flora endemic to Italy. Biological Conservation 224: 213222.10.1016/j.biocon.2018.05.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peruzzi, L, Roma-Marzio, F, Pinzani, L, Bedini, G (2019) Wikiplantbase #Italia [www document]. URL https://bot.biologia.unipi.it/wpb/italia Google Scholar
Pignatti, S (2018) Flora d’Italia (volume 3, pp. 875876). Milan, Italy: Edagricole-New Business Media.Google Scholar
Pörtner, HO, Roberts, DC, Tignor, M, Poloczanska, E, Mintenbeck, K, Alegría, A et al. (2022) IPPC 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Working Group II Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York, NY, USA: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Google Scholar
Qian, C, Fu, CB, Wu, ZH (2011) Changes in the amplitude of the temperature annual cycle in China and their implication for climate change research. Journal of Climate 24: 52925302.10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00006.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qian, H, Zhang, Y, Ricklefs, RE, Wang, X (2022) Relationship of minimum winter temperature and temperature seasonality to the northern range limit and species richness of trees in North America. Journal of Geographical Sciences 32: 280290.10.1007/s11442-022-1947-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raup, DM (1986) Biological extinction in Earth history. Science 231: 15281533.10.1126/science.11542058CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Renner, SS, Zohner, CM (2018) Climate change and phenological mismatch in trophic interactions among plants, insects, and vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 49: 165182.10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, DR, Bahn, V, Ciuti, S, Boyce, MS, Elith, J, Guillera-Arroita, G et al. (2017) Cross-validation strategies for data with temporal, spatial, hierarchical, or phylogenetic structure. Ecography 40: 913929.10.1111/ecog.02881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, CD, Cameron, A, Green, RE, Bakkenes, M, Beaumont, LJ, Collingham, YC et al. (2004) Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427: 145148.10.1038/nature02121CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, DJ (1995) The seasons, global temperature, and precession. Science 268: 5968.10.1126/science.268.5207.59CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tilman, D, Clark, M, Williams, DR, Kimmel, K, Polasky, S, Packer, C (2017) Future threats to biodiversity and pathways to their prevention. Nature 546: 7381.10.1038/nature22900CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Title, PO, Bemmels, JB (2018) envirem: an expanded set of bioclimatic and topographic variables increases flexibility and improves performance of ecological niche modeling. Ecography 41: 291307.10.1111/ecog.02880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tollefson, J (2022) Climate change is hitting the planet faster than scientists originally thought. Nature. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-022-00585-7 (online ahead of print).Google ScholarPubMed
Varaldo, L, Dagnino, D, Guerrina, M, Minuto, L, Casazza, G (2021) Can species distributions models help to design conservation strategies for narrow-ranged species under climate change? A case study from Santolina genus. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Electronic Conference on Biological Diversity, Ecology and Evolution, 15–31 March 2021. Basel, Switzerland: MDPI.Google Scholar
Veron, S, Clergeau, P, Pavoine, S (2016) Loss and conservation of evolutionary history in the Mediterranean Basin. BMC Ecology 16: 115.10.1186/s12898-016-0099-3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiens, JJ (2016) Climate-related local extinctions are already widespread among plant and animal species. PLoS Biology 14: e2001104.10.1371/journal.pbio.2001104CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1. Extinct (red) and extant (blue) populations of Santolina etrusca.

Figure 1

Table 1. Comparison of land-cover categories shared between extinct and extant Santolina etrusca populations: number of cells classified as extinct or extant for each land-cover category, along with the average percentage (± standard deviation (SD)) of each class within extinct and extant populations.

Figure 2

Table 2. List of modern climatic indices showing statistically significant differences between sites with extinct and extant populations of Santolina etrusca, detected through Mann–Whitney U-tests with Benjamini–Hochberg adjusted p-values ≤ 0.01. Variables retained after the principal component analysis are shown in bold.

Figure 3

Figure 2. Biplot of the principal component analysis (PCA) of modern climatic conditions at sites with extant (blue) and extinct (red) populations of Santolina etrusca. Points represent the sites. The 95% confidence ellipses depict the climatic niche occupied by each group. BIO4 = Temperature Seasonality; BIO7 = Temperature Annual Range; BIO12 = Annual Precipitation; BIO13 = Precipitation of Wettest Month; BIO14 = Precipitation of Driest Month; BIO16 = Precipitation of Wettest Quarter; BIO17 = Precipitation of Driest Quarter; BIO18 = Precipitation of Warmest Quarter; VAR3 = Climatic Moisture Index; VAR4 = Continentality; VAR11 = Potential Evapotranspiration Coldest Quarter.

Figure 4

Figure 3. Violin plots illustrating the comparison of historical (1901–1930) and modern (1980–2010) climatic variables at sites of Santolina etrusca occurrence. Climatic values from extinct sites are in red, whereas climate values from extant sites are in blue. PET = potential evapotranspiration.

Supplementary material: File

Peruzzi et al. supplementary material 1

Peruzzi et al. supplementary material
Download Peruzzi et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 24.4 KB
Supplementary material: File

Peruzzi et al. supplementary material 2

Peruzzi et al. supplementary material
Download Peruzzi et al. supplementary material 2(File)
File 24.9 KB