{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0175054704595186, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.261904761904762, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Appropriateness of full‐, partial‐ and no‐dispersal scenarios in climate change impact modelling

Species distribution models (SDMs) generally use correlative relationships between the species location and the associated environment to project the species potential distribution under climate change. While projecting a future suitable climatic space is relatively simple using SDMs, predicting a species ability to occupy that space relies on understanding dispersal capacity; a lack of knowledge about species‐specific dispersal ability, varying geographical contexts and technical constraints of simple SDMs has limited the consideration of dispersal in most studies. We review the current treatment of dispersal in SDM studies addressing the effects of climate change and explore how incorporating ‘partial‐dispersal’ scenarios could lead to more realistic projections of species distributions into the future.