Aim: The increasing availability of regional and global climate data presents an opportunity to build better ecological models; however, it is not always clear which climate dataset is most appropriate. The aim of this study was to better understand the impacts that alternative climate datasets have on the modelled distribution of plant species, and to develop systematic approaches to enhancing their use in species distribution models (SDMs).Location: Victoria, southeast Australia and the Himalayan Kingdom of Bhutan.Methods: We compared the statistical performance of SDMs for 38 plant species in Victoria and 12 plant species in Bhutan with multiple algorithms using globally and regionally calibrated climate datasets. Individual models were compared against one another and as SDM ensembles to explore the potential for alternative predictions to improve statistical performance. We develop two new spatially continuous metrics that support the interpretation of ensemble predictions by characterizing the per‐pixel congruence and variability of contributing models.Results: There was no clear consensus on which climate dataset performed best across all species in either study region. On average, multi‐model ensembles (across the same species with different climate data) increased AUC/TSS/Kappa/OA by up to 0.02/0.03/0.03/0.02 in Victoria and 0.06/0.11/0.11/0.05 in Bhutan. Ensembles performed better than most single models in both Victoria (AUC = 85%; TSS = 68%) and Bhutan (AUC = 86%; TSS = 69%). SDM ensembles using models fitted with alternative algorithms and/or climate datasets each provided a significant improvement over single model runs.Main conclusions: Our results demonstrate that SDM ensembles, built using alternative models of the same climate variables, can quantify model congruence and identify regions of the highest uncertainty while mitigating the risk of erroneous predictions. Algorithm selection is known to be a large source of error for SDMs, and our results demonstrate that climate dataset selection can be a comparably significant source of uncertainty.

Extreme weather can have significant impacts on plant species demography; however, most studies have focused on responses to a single or small number of extreme events. Long‐term patterns in climate extremes, and how they have shaped contemporary distributions, have rarely been considered or tested. BIOCLIM variables that are commonly used in correlative species distribution modelling studies cannot be used to quantify climate extremes, as they are generated using long‐term averages and therefore do not describe year‐to‐year, temporal variability. We evaluated the response of 37 plant species to base climate (long‐term means, equivalent to BIOCLIM variables), variability (standard deviations) and extremes of varying return intervals (defined using quantiles) based on historical observations. These variables were generated using fine‐grain (approx. 250 m), time‐series temperature and precipitation data for the hottest, coldest and driest months over 39 years. Extremes provided significant additive improvements in model performance compared to base climate alone and were more consistent than variability across all species. Models that included extremes frequently showed notably different mapped predictions relative to those using base climate alone, despite often small differences in statistical performance as measured as a summary across sites. These differences in spatial patterns were most pronounced at the predicted range margins, and reflect the influence of coastal proximity, continentality, topography and orographic barriers on climate extremes. Species occupying hotter and drier locations that are exposed to severe maximum temperature extremes were associated with better predictive performance when modelled using extremes. Understanding how plant species have historically responded to climate extremes may provide valuable insights into our understanding of contemporary distributions and help to make more accurate predictions under a changing climate.