American chestnut restoration maps need more than post-blight occurrence points
WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS
Researchers used a Bayesian joint species distribution model for 39 eastern forest tree species, including 11 historically associated with American chestnut. Projected relative abundance of the associated trees shifted northward, with opportunities in the Northeast, northern Michigan and some Appalachian highlands. Areas projected to gain in the relative abundance of chestnut-associated trees overlapped 5,598 unique conservation areas under +2°C warming and 2,988 under +4°C warming above preindustrial levels. These are candidates for experimental planting, not field-verified restoration sites.
WHY IT MATTERS / OUR READ
For restoration projects, use climate-aware community maps to prioritize candidate sites, then test soils, disease resistance, planting material, landowner goals and actual site conditions. A model is a screening layer for experimental planting—not a field prescription or a forecast of successful chestnut recovery.
CAVEATS / UNCERTAINTY
Predicted associated-tree suitability is not direct chestnut survival, seedling recruitment or blight-resistance performance. Climate scenario uncertainty, land-use constraints and the suitability of specific planting stock require site-level verification.
SOURCE
Fertakos et al. · Journal of Applied Ecology · American chestnut climate restoration modeling
View original evidence ↗
Author-hosted full research paper
View supporting source ↗
A forest-community model locates possible restoration partners and sites—but does not test which planted chestnuts will survive.
Read the Wild Lands assessment →