The golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) has been poorly studied in Mexico. Even though it is listed as threatened in this country, partly because of habitat fragmentation and direct persecution, little is known of its distribution. We assessed the potential distribution of this species in Mexico using ecological niche modelling (ecological niche factor analysis, artificial neural network, genetic algorithm for rule-set production, environmental distance, support vector machine, MaxEnt) and the weighted average ensemble method. The models were evaluated using the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristics. We applied a threshold of 50% probability to obtain high-suitability areas and considered marginality and specialization calculated by ecological niche factor analysis and the most important variables to the model. We assessed and evaluated the percentage of high-suitability area occurring in all Mexican natural protected areas. The performance of the ensemble model was high (area under the curve = 0.93) and the most important variables contributing to the model were grasslands and tree cover percentage. The resulting high-suitability area is considerably fragmented, it comprises 16% of the country and just 8% of it is located in natural protected areas. We propose some urgent actions and conservation measures to face the main problems that are threatening the species in Mexico.
WatsonJ.The Golden Eagle. London: T. & A. D. Poyser, 2010.
2.
CITES. Convention on International Trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora (Appendices I, II, III). Washington, DC: CITES, 2016, p. 46.
3.
IUCN. The IUCN red list of threatened species (version 2015-4), 2015, www.iucnredlist.org (accessed 19 November 2015).
4.
Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT). Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2010. Protección ambiental – Especies nativas de México de flora y fauna silvestres – Categoría de riesgo y especificaciones para su inclusión, exclusión o cambio – Lista de especies de riesgo. Diario Oficial de la Federación, Órgano del Gobierno Constitucional de Estados Unidos Mexicanos, diciembre de2010, 2010.
5.
KochertMNSteenhofKMcIntyreCLet al. Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). In: PooleAGillF (eds) The birds of North America. Philadelphia, PA: The Birds of North America, 2002, pp. 1–44.
6.
BirdLife International. Species factsheet:Aquila chrysaetos, 2018, http://www.birdlife.org (accessed 7 March 2018).
7.
NocedalJ.Estudio para la protección y manejo del Águila Real (Aquila chrysaetos Linnaeus, 1758) en el Estado de Durango. Informe final, Instituto de Ecología, Universidad Juárez de Durango, Durango, 1993, pp. 1–50.
8.
Rodríguez-EstrellaR.A survey of Golden Eagles in northern Mexico in 1984 and recent records in central and southern Baja California Peninsula. J Raptor Res2002; 36(1): 3–9.
9.
De León-GirónGRodríguez-EstrellaRRuiz-CamposG. Current distribution status of Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) in northwestern Baja California, Mexico. Rev Mex Biodivers2016; 87: 1328–1335.
10.
Rodríguez-EstrellaRLlinas GutiérrezJCancinoJ.New Golden Eagle records from Baja California. J Raptor Res1991; 25(3): 68–71.
11.
Lozano-RománLF.Primer informe sobre la identificación de áreas de anidación del águila real (Aquila chrysaetos) en el estado de Aguascalientes, 2008. CONANP/DGOR/DEP/029/2008.
12.
Urbina-TorresFRomodeVivar-ÁlvarezCNavarro-SigüenzaAG.Notas sobre la distribución de algunas aves en Morelos, México. Huitzil2009; 10(1): 30–37.
13.
SEMARNAP. Proyecto de protección, conservación y recuperación del águila real, México. Mexico City, Mexico: SEMARNAP, 1999, p. 47.
14.
Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT). Programa de acción para la conservación de la especie: águila real (Aquila chrysaetos). México City, Mexico: CONANP, 2008, 50 p.
15.
Ruiz-CamposGPalaciosECastillo-GuerreroJAet al. Composición espacial y temporal de la avifauna de humedales pequeños costeros y hábitat adyacentes en el noroeste de Baja California, México. Cienc mar2005; 31(3): 553–576.
16.
Lozano-RománLF.Estudio de caso. El águila real (Aquila chrysaetos) en el estado de Aguascalientes, México. Conservación biodivers2007; 6: 175.
17.
Jiménez-PérezLCde la CuevaHMolina-PeraltaFet al. Avifauna del estero de Punta Banda. Baja California: México. Acta Zool Mex2009; 25(3): 589–608.
18.
Guerrero-CárdenasIGalina TessaroPÁlvarez CárdenasSet al. Avistamientos recientes de águila real (Aquila chrysaetos) en la sierra El Mechudo, Baja California Sur, México. Rev Mex Biodiv2012; 83: 397–401.
19.
BravoVMGMirelesMCZúñigaMJet al. Composición y amplitud de la dieta del águila real en Chihuahua, México. Acta Zool Mex2015; 31(1): 116–119.
20.
WinkerKWarnerDWDickermanRW.Additional bird records from Oaxaca, Mexico. Ornitol Neotrop1992; 3: 69–70.
21.
Ferguson-LeesJChristieDA.Raptors of the world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006, p. 320.
22.
Rodríguez-EstrellaR.El Águila Real (Aquila chrysaetos). In: OrtegaAArriagaL (eds) La Reserva de la Biosfera El Vizcaíno en la Península de Baja California. Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas, 1991, pp. 247–263.
23.
EccardiF.El águila real, símbolo de la identidad mexicana. CONABIO. Biodiversitas2008; 77: 1–6.
24.
CollopyMWEdwardsTCJr.Territory size, activity budget, and role of undulating flight in nesting Golden Eagles. J Field Ornithol1989; 60(1): 45–51.
25.
Lozano-RománLFVillalobos-SánchezV.Dieta alimenticia del águila real en la serranía Juan el Grande, Aguascalientes, México. In: Décimo Simposium de Investigación y Desarrollo Tecnológico Aguascalientes 2003 (Consejo de Ciencia y Tecnología del Estado de Aguascalientes e Instituto Tecnológico de Aguascalientes), Mexico City, Mexico, 24–28November2003.
26.
Leader-WilliamsNDublinHT.Charismatic megafauna as ‘flagship species’. Priorities for the conservation of mammalian diversity: has the panda had its day?New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp. 53–81.
27.
FascioneNDelachASmithM.People and predators: from conflict to coexistence. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2004.
28.
KatznerTESmithBWMillerTAet al. Status, biology, and conservation priorities for North America’s eastern Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) population. Auk2012; 129: 168–176.
29.
Hawks Aloft Inc. Monitoring Nesting Golden Eagles for the Farmington Field Office, and Nesting Raptors for the Taos Field Office, BLM Resource Areas, New Mexico, 2006 (Annual Report), http://hawksaloft.org/avian-research/publications/
CorsiFDupréEBoitaniL.A large-scale model of wolf distribution in Italy for conservation planning. Conserv Biol1999; 13(1): 150–159.
32.
PetersonATRobinsCR. Using ecological-niche modeling to predict barred owl invasions with implications for spotted owl conservation. Conserv Biol2003; 17(4): 1161–1165.
33.
PetersonATShawJ. Lutzomyia vectors for cutaneous leishmaniasis in Southern Brazil: ecological niche models, predicted geographic distributions, and climate change effects. Int J Parasitol2003; 33(9): 919–931.
34.
FerrierSDrielsmaMManionGet al. Extended statistical approaches to modelling spatial pattern in biodiversity in north-east New South Wales. II. Community-level modelling. Biodivers Conserv2002; 11: 2309–2338.
35.
PrestonKLRotenberryJTRedakRAet al. Habitat shifts of endangered species under altered climate conditions: importance of biotic interactions. Glob Chang Biol2008; 14: 2501–2515.
36.
ChanLMBrownJLYoderAD.Integrating statistical genetic and geospatial methods brings new power to phylogeography. Mol Phylogenet Evol2011; 59: 523–537.
37.
AraújoMBNewM.Ensemble forecasting of species distributions. Trends Ecol Evol2007; 22(1): 42–47.
38.
GuisanAZimmermanNE.Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Model2000; 135: 147–186.
39.
ElithEBurgmanMAReganHM.Mapping epistemic uncertainties and vague concepts in predictions of species distribution. Ecol Model2002; 157: 313–329.
40.
PhillipsSJAndersonRPSchapireRE.Maximum entropy modelling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model2006; 190: 231–259.
41.
ThuillerW.Patterns and uncertainties of species’ range shifts under climate change. Glob Chang Biol2004; 10: 2020–2027.
42.
MarmionMParviainenMLuotoMet al. Evaluation of consensus methods in predictive species distribution modelling. Divers Distrib2009; 15: 55–69.
43.
ComteLGrenouilletG.Species distribution modelling and imperfect detection: comparing occupancy versus consensus methods. Divers Distrib2013; 19(8): 996–1007.
44.
Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO). Provincias biogeográficas de México. Catálogo de metadatos geográficos. Mexico City, Mexico: CONABIO, 1997.
45.
De AlbaEReyesME. Contexto físico: La diversidad biológica de México estudio de país (ed. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad). México City, Mexico: CONABIO, 1998, pp. 3–21.
46.
Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). http://www.gbif.org/ (accessed 17 September 2014).
47.
VertNet: distributed databases with backbone. National Science Foundation, http://vertnet.org/ (accessed 17 September 2014).
Organization for Food and Agriculture of United Nations (FAO). Global forest resources assessment. FAO Forestry Paper 140, 2001, http://www.fao.org/forestry/fo/fra/index.jsp (accessed 19 November 2015).
De FriesRHansenMTownshendJRGet al. 1 kilometer tree cover continuous fields 1992–1993. College Park, MD: Department of Geography, University of Maryland, 2000, http://glcf.umd.edu/data/treecover/
53.
INEGI. Guía para la interpretación de cartografía. Uso del suelo y vegetación. Escala 1:250 000 (Serie V). México City, Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía, 2014, p. 195.
54.
Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) – Columbia University. Gridded population of the world (Version 4 [GPWv4]: Population Density. Beta Release). Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC), 2015, http://dx.doi.org/10.7927/H46T0JKB (accessed December 2015).
Monroy-VilchisOCastillo-HuitrónNMZarco-GonzálezMMet al. Potential distribution of Ursus americanus in Mexico and its persistence: implications for conservation. J Nat Conserv2015; 29: 62–68.
57.
ClarkLabs. IDRISI 17.0: the Selva edition. Worcester, MA: Clark University, 2012.
58.
HirzelAHHausserJPerrinN.Biomapper 4.0. Lab. of conservation biology, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, 2009, www.unil.ch/biomapper (accessed November 2015).
59.
HirzelAHHausserJChesselDet al. Ecological-niche factor analysis: how to compute habitat-suitability maps without absence data?Ecology2002; 83: 2027–2036.
60.
PhillipsSJDudikMShapireRE.A maximum entropy approach to species distribution modeling. In: Proceedings of the twenty-first international conference on machine learning, Banff, AB, Canada, 4–8 July 2004, pp. 655–662. New York: ACM.
61.
GevreyMIoannisDLekS.Review and comparison of methods to study the contribution of variables in artificial neural network models. Ecol Model2003; 160: 249–264.
62.
PearsonRGDawsonTPLiuC.Modelling species distributions in Britain: a hierarchical integration of climate and land-cover data. Ecography2004; 27: 285–298.
63.
HirzelAArlettazR.Modeling habitat suitability for complex species distributions by environmental-distance geometric mean. Environ Manage2003; 32: 614–623.
64.
StockwellDRBPetersDP. The GARP modeling system: problems and solutions to automated spatial prediction. Int J Geogr Inf Syst1999; 13: 143–158.
65.
CristianiniNScholkopfB.Support vector machines and kernel methods – the new generation of learning machines. AI Mag2002; 23: 31–41.
66.
HanleyJAMcNeilBJ.The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology1982; 143: 29–36.
67.
ManelSWilliamsHCOrmerodSJ.Evaluating presence-absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence. J Appl Ecol2001; 38: 921–931.
68.
SeguradoPAraújoMB.An evaluation of methods for modelling species distributions. J Biogeogr2004; 31(10): 1555–1568.
69.
HirzelAHPosseBOggierPAet al. Ecological requirements of reintroduced species and the implications for release policy: the case of the bearded vulture. J Appl Ecol2004; 41(6): 1103–1116.
70.
FranklinJ.Mapping species distributions: spatial inference and prediction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
71.
LiuCBerryPMDawsonTPet al. Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distribution. Ecography2005; 28: 385–393.
CONANP. Registra CONANP águila real en sitios de distribución histórica. In: Comunicado de prensa CONANP/SEMARNAT2016, Mexico City, Mexico, 12February2016.
74.
LiuCWhiteMNewellG.Selecting thresholds for the prediction of species occurrence with presence-only data. J Biogeogr2013; 40(4): 778–789.
75.
Mendoza-GonzálezGMartínezMLRojas-SotoOet al. Priority areas for conservation of beach and dune vegetation of the Mexican Atlantic coast. J Nat Conserv2016; 33: 25–34.
76.
SoutulloAUriosVFerrerMet al. Dispersal of Golden Eagles Aquila chrysaetos during their first year of life. Bird Study2006; 53(3): 258–264.
77.
EspinosaDOceguedaSAguilarCet al. El conocimiento biogeográfico de las especies y su regionalización natural. Cap Nat México2008; 1: 22–65.
78.
Manzano-FischerPListRCeballosG.Grassland birds in prairie dog towns in Northwestern Chihuahua, Mexico. Stud Avian Biol1999; 19: 263–271.
79.
BehrstockRAEubanksTL.Additions to the avifauna of Nuevo León, México with notes on new breeding records and infrequently seen species. Cotinga1997; 7: 27–30.
80.
FriedmannH. The birds of North and Middle America (Part XI. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 50). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, 1950.
81.
KochertMNSteenhofKCarpenterLBet al. Effects of fire on golden eagle territory occupancy and reproductive success. J Wildl Manage1999; 63(3): 773–780.
82.
SteenhofKKochertMNMcDonaldTL.Interactive effects of prey and weather on golden eagle reproduction. J Anim Ecol1997; 66: 350–362.
83.
KnickSDyerDL.Distribution of black-tailed jackrabbit habitat determined by GIS in southwestern Idaho. J Wildl Manage1997; 61: 75–86.
84.
Manzano-FischerPListRCeballosGet al. Avian diversity in a priority area for conservation in North America: the Janos-Casas Grandes Prairie Dog Complex and adjacent habitats in northwestern Mexico. Biodivers Conserv2006; 15: 3801–3825.
85.
CONABIO, SEMARNAT and Cuarto Informe Nacional de México al Convenio sobre Diversidad Bioĺgica (CDB). Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad y Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. México City, Mexico: Conabio, 2009.
86.
SEMARNAT. Indicadores Clave y de Desempeño Ambiental (Informe de la Situación del Medio Ambiente en México. Compendio de Estadísticas Ambientales). 2012 ed. México City, Mexico: SEMARNAT, 2013.
87.
MarzluffJMKnickSTVekasyMSet al. Spatial use and habitat selection of golden eagles in southwestern Idaho. Auk1997; 114(4): 673–687.
88.
SteenhofKKochertMN.Dietary responses of three raptor species to changing prey densities in a natural environment. J Anim Ecol1988; 57: 37–48.
89.
GordonS.The Golden Eagle. London: Harper Collins, 1955.
90.
ArnoldLW.The Golden Eagle and its economic status (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular n° 27). Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1954.
91.
Lozano-RománL. Reporte técnico sobre el águila real Aquila chrysaetos y el halcón peregrino Falco peregrinus, en la Barranca de San Blas, Rincón de Romos, Aguascalientes, México, CONANP, 2013.
