Wilting Wildflowers and Bummed-Out Bees: Climate Change Threatens U.S. State Symbols
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (PREreview)
Abstract
Species designated as state symbols in the United States carry cultural importance and embody historical heritage. However, they are threatened by climate change and even face the risk of local or global extinction. The responses of these species to climate change have received little attention. In this study, we examine the effects of climate change on 64 state flowers and 68 state insects in the United States by employing correlative species distribution models (SDMs). We select a variety of commonly used SDM algorithms to construct an ensemble forecasting framework aimed at predicting the potential climatic habitats for each species under both historical (1981-2010) and future (2071-2100) climate scenarios (SSP1-2.6 and SSP5-8.5), and how these changes might influence the habitat suitability of flower and insect species within their symbolic states and across the United States. Our results indicate that 30 − 66% of state flowers and 18 − 51% of state insects are projected to experience substantial losses of climatically suitable habitat within their symbolic states. Under the high-emissions scenario (SSP5-8.5), ten state flowers and three state insects are likely to face local extinction by the 2080s. Although most of these species may find suitable habitats in other states, only two are projected to have such areas located adjacent to their current symbolic states, potentially limiting natural dispersal. Nationally, 85% of flower species and 71 − 79% of insect species are expected to shift their suitable habitat both poleward and uphill, with the magnitude of latitudinal and elevational shifts significantly greater under SSP5-8.5 than under SSP1-2.6. These findings highlight the vulnerability of culturally significant species to climate change and underscore the urgency of integrating climate adaptation into conservation planning. Proactive, forward-looking conservation and management strategies may be critical for preserving cultural heritage and maintaining ecosystem resilience.
Article activity feed
-
This Zenodo record is a permanently preserved version of a PREreview. You can view the complete PREreview at https://prereview.org/reviews/13852443.
Summary and Strengths
This study attempts to determine the impact of climate change on habitat suitability of culturally significant U.S. state symbols, mainly flowers and insects. To this aim, the authors use multiple correlative SDM algorithms to predict potential habitats of these species under historical (1981-2010) and future (2071-2100) climate scenarios. One of their main findings is that over half of the state flowers and insects will face negative overall effects, potentially leading to local extinction or reduced suitability, thus threatening cultural heritage.
This study distinguishes itself from existing literature - which has primarily focused on climate impacts on …
This Zenodo record is a permanently preserved version of a PREreview. You can view the complete PREreview at https://prereview.org/reviews/13852443.
Summary and Strengths
This study attempts to determine the impact of climate change on habitat suitability of culturally significant U.S. state symbols, mainly flowers and insects. To this aim, the authors use multiple correlative SDM algorithms to predict potential habitats of these species under historical (1981-2010) and future (2071-2100) climate scenarios. One of their main findings is that over half of the state flowers and insects will face negative overall effects, potentially leading to local extinction or reduced suitability, thus threatening cultural heritage.
This study distinguishes itself from existing literature - which has primarily focused on climate impacts on ecologically and economically significant species - by introducing the concept of "cultural loss". This adds a new layer of complexity to land and resource management for which the authors offer valuable guidance.
The reviewers found the authors' argument to be well constructed and would like to highlight the following strengths:
There was sufficient background information (e.g., historical context) to understand the reasoning and purpose of study.
The research question was clearly stated.
The SDM algorithms were appropriate for addressing the proposed research question.
The graphics were well constructed – they were clean, easy to interpret, displayed an appropriate amount of information, and were clearly referenced in text.
Interpretations of the study were matched with relevant examples and practical solutions/approaches.
Limitations of their study design were discussed.
The presentation of ideas flowed well, and the text had high readability.
Our critiques of the preprint are listed below, categorized as Major Issues or Minor Issues. In short, we recommend further clarification, context, and consistency within the manuscript.
Major Issues
The reviewers would like clarity on what data were used to generate their models. For example, the authors state (lines 918-919) that historical models were made with both temperature and precipitation; yet they pulled the most intense warming scenarios for their future species distribution models (lines 923-925). Other studies have shown that temperature and precipitation interact to change SDMs (Harsch and HilleRisLambers, 2016). Please clarify whether precipitation data were used, and if not, how that might impact the validity of the SDMs.
Minor Issues
Introduction
Please provide an example of how nations use funds to conserve their cultural heritage (lines 52-53), such as institutional partnerships or grants to ensure proper curation of museum or library collections.
The Introduction places a lot of emphasis on flora – please provide some additional context related to culturally significant insects and how they're impacted by climate change OR shift the focus to only state flowers.
The argument would be more substantiated with current, tangible examples of how individuals are culturally/historically connected with their state symbols.
Methods
Due to some state flowers not actually being true flowers (i.e., one is a gymnosperm), we recommend including a disclaimer within the "Species List" section that states something along the lines of, "Although not all state flowers are true flowers, for this paper, we will use the term 'state flower'."
Results
The reviewers would find it helpful if the authors would maintain consistency in presentation of the results, specifically in providing subheadings for "Climate change impacts on state insects".
Discussion
The Discussion places a lot of emphasis on interpreting results related to the state flowers – please provide some additional information on the insects, including management strategies OR, like our comment above, consider shifting the focus to only state flowers.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
-
