Mechanistic and correlative models are two types of species distribution
models (SDMs). They each have distinct foci, conceptual foundations, and
levels of dependency on data availability, leading to potentially
different estimates of species’ ecological niches and distributions.
Mechanistic SDMs integrate detailed biological processes, making it
possible to account for species’ biotic interactions. Despite their
assumed importance, interactions in species distribution modeling remain
uncommon. In this study, we applied an ensemble model of multiple
correlative SDMs, a mechanistic SDM of the focal species (prey) alone,
and a mechanistic SDM of the predator-prey interactions, to compare the
predictions of correlative and mechanistic approaches and assess their
relative strengths and limitations. We predict there are considerable
and subtle differences in various predictions generated by the
correlative and mechanistic approaches for each aphid species, which
call for prior knowledge concerning species’ presence data or life
histories. Our mechanistic SDMs allowed for the assessment of the
relative significance of abiotic and biotic factors, along with their
interactions, in determining species’ habitat suitability. Additionally,
we predict aphid habitat suitability decreases across continents due to
the effect of predation. However, this decrease may be offset or
enhanced by the interaction effect between predation and climate change
in different regions. This suggests the necessity of accounting for
biotic interactions and the interplay between abiotic and biotic factors
in mechanistic approaches. Our research highlights the impact of model
philosophies in SDM studies and addresses the importance of selecting an
appropriate modeling approach in line with the study’s objectives.
Furthermore, our study suggests that mechanistic SDMs could serve as a
valuable addition for assessing the robustness of correlative SDM
predictions.