SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS
APPENDIX S1: List of passerine species
Common Name
Acadian Flycatcher1
Bachman's Sparrow2
Black-throated Blue Warbler1
Blue-winged Warbler1
Brewer's Sparrow1
Brown-headed Nuthatch2
Carolina Chickadee2
Cerulean Warbler1
Dickcissel1
Eastern Towhee3
Eastern Wood-Pewee1
Field Sparrow1
Fish Crow2
Golden-winged Warbler1
Gray Flycatcher1
Green-tailed Towhee1
Henslow's Sparrow3
Hermit Warbler1
Hooded Warbler1
Indigo Bunting1
Juniper Titmouse2
Kentucky Warbler1
Louisiana Waterthrush1
Northern Parula1
Pine Warbler1
Prairie Warbler1
Prothonotary Warbler1
Sage Thrasher1
Swainson's Warbler1
Tufted Titmouse2
Wood Thrush1
Worm-eating Warbler1
Yellow-throated Vireo1
Yellow-throated Warbler1
Scientific Name
Empidonax virescens
Peucaea aestivalis
Setophaga caerulescens
Vermivora cyanoptera
Spizella breweri
Sitta pusilla
Poecile carolinensis
Setophaga cerulea
Spiza americana
Pipilo erythrophthalmus
Contopus virens
Spizella pusilla
Corvus ossifragus
Vermivora chrysoptera
Empidonax wrightii
Pipilo chlorurus
Ammodramus henslowii
Setophaga occidentalis
Setophaga citrina
Passerina cyanea
Baeolophus ridgwayi
Geothlypis formosa
Parkesia motacilla
Setophaga americana
Setophaga pinus
Setophaga discolor
Protonotaria citrea
Oreoscoptes montanus
Limnothlypis swainsonii
Baeolophus bicolor
Hylocichla mustelina
Helmitheros vermivorus
Vireo flavifrons
Setophaga dominica
Habitat Association
mature deciduous, coniferous
mature pine and open habitat
undisturbed hardwood and mixed forest
sapling, forest edge, clear cut
sagebrush shrubland
pine forest
riverine habitat, swamp forest
forest
prairie grassland
scrubby habitat, edge associated
wooded habitat
brushy pasture, second groth scrub
coastal, riverine
partially open canopy and disturbance
sagebrush woodland, pine forest
shrubby habitat
grassland
coniferous
hardwood and edge habitat
shrubby areas, weedy fields
juniper woodland
deciduous forest
streamside habitat with forest canopy
canopy
pine forest
fields, early successional
water associated forest
sagebrush shrubland
forest
deciduous forest
forest
forest
forest
forest
1
neotropical migrant
resident species
3
short distance migrant
2
1
1
FIGURE LEGEND
2
3
FIGURE 1 SUPPLEMENTAL:
4
Relationship between mean spring temperature at the realized niche margin (calculated as the 10
5
coldest/warmest routes with species occurrence during 1984-88) and mean spring temperature at
6
the range margin expected to correspond to the niche edge (calculated as the 10 poleward /
7
equatorward routes with species occurrence during 1984-88) at the a) cool edge and b) warm
8
edge for neotropical migrants (n=26) and c) cool edge and d) warm edge for species bounded by
9
the Gulf of Mexico at their equatorward margin (n=21). The black line represents an observed
10
relationship, and the dashed line represents expected relationship if there is perfect
11
correspondence between thermal niche limits and species’ range margin. Circular data points
12
represent species that are shifting as expected based on temperature change. Temperature was
13
corrected for total niche breadth.
14
15
Figure 2 SUPPLEMENTAL:
16
Temporal relationship in environmental distance calculated as the difference in mean spring
17
temperature (°C) separating the thermal niche boundary and range margin in 1984-88 and 2002-
18
06 for a) the poleward margin and cool niche boundary, and b) the equatorward margin and
19
warm niche boundary for neotropical migrants (n=26), and c) the poleward margin and cool
20
niche boundary, and d) the equatorward margin and warm niche boundary for species bounded
21
by the Gulf of Mexico (n=21). The black line represents the observed relationship and the
22
dashed line represents the expected relationship. Circular data points represent species that are
2
23
shifting as expected given temperature changes. Temperature was corrected for total niche
24
breadth.
25
26
Figure 3 SUPPLEMENTAL:
27
Probability of range margin shift based on local changes in mean spring temperature as a
28
function of thermal niche proximity for a) poleward margin (log-likelihood = -21.36277,
29
p=0.21), and b) equatorward margin (log-likelihood = -20.14979, p=0.059). Populations closer
30
to warm niche limits were more likely to be lost through time, while colonization at the poleward
31
margin was not related to the proximity of those populations to cold niche limits in the early time
32
period. Expectations were based on the direction of climate change (warming or cooling) at
33
occupied sites along range margins. Resident and short-distance migrants were excluded.
34
35
Figure 4 SUPPLEMENTAL:
36
Mean abundance change with change in temperature from 1984-1988 to 2002-2006 for a) cool
37
thermal limit, b) warm thermal limit, and c) poleward, and d) equatorward margin. Sites
38
occupied in 1984-1988 were held constant and absences in 2002-2006 were recorded as
39
population extinction. Residents, short-distance migrants and neotropical migrants were
40
included.
41
42
Figure 5 SUPPLEMENTAL:
43
Mean abundance change with change in temperature from 1984-1988 to 2002-2006 for a) cool
44
thermal limit, b) warm thermal limit, c) poleward margin, and d) equatorward margin. Sites
3
45
occupied in 1984-1988 were held constant and routes with absences in 2002-2006 were not
46
included. Residents, short-distance migrants and neotropical migrants were included.
4