Anthropogenic pressures on the Earth System have reached a scale where abrupt global environmental change can no longer be excluded. We propose a new approach to global sustainability in which we define planetary boundaries within which we expect that humanity can operate safely. Transgressing one or more planetary boundaries may be deleterious or even catastrophic due to the risk of crossing thresholds that will trigger non-linear, abrupt environmental change within continental- to planetary-scale systems. We have identified nine planetary boundaries and, drawing upon current scientific understanding, we propose quantifications for seven of them. These seven are climate change (CO2 concentration in the atmosphere <350 ppm and/or a maximum change of +1 W m-2 in radiative forcing); ocean acidification (mean surface seawater saturation state with respect to aragonite ≥ 80% of pre-industrial levels); stratospheric ozone (<5% reduction in O3 concentration from pre-industrial level of 290 Dobson Units); biogeochemical nitrogen (N) cycle (limit industrial and agricultural fixation of N2 to 35 Tg N yr-1) and phosphorus (P) cycle (annual P inflow to oceans not to exceed 10 times the natural background weathering of P); global freshwater use (<4000 km3 yr-1 of consumptive use of runoff resources); land system change (<15% of the ice-free land surface under cropland); and the rate at which biological diversity is lost (annual rate of <10 extinctions per million species). The two additional planetary boundaries for which we have not yet been able to determine a boundary level are chemical pollution and atmospheric aerosol loading. We estimate that humanity has already transgressed three planetary boundaries: for climate change, rate of biodiversity loss, and changes to the global nitrogen cycle. Planetary boundaries are interdependent, because transgressing one may both shift the position of other boundaries or cause them to be transgressed. The social impacts of transgressing boundaries will be a function of the social-ecological resilience of the affected societies. Our proposed boundaries are rough, first estimates only, surrounded by large uncertainties and knowledge gaps. Filling these gaps will require major advancements in Earth System and resilience science. The proposed concept of "planetary boundaries" lays the groundwork for shifting our approach to governance and management, away from the essentially sectoral analyses of limits to growth aimed at minimizing negative externalities, toward the estimation of the safe space for human development. Planetary boundaries define, as it were, the boundaries of the "planetary playing field" for humanity if we want to be sure of avoiding major human-induced environmental change on a global scale.

/pdf/planetary-boundaries-exploring-the-safe-operating-space-for-ir5ysgjg96.pdf

Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity

Palaeontologists characterize mass extinctions as times when the Earth loses more than three-quarters of its species in a geologically short interval, as has happened only five times in the past 540 million years or so. Biologists now suggest that a sixth mass extinction may be under way, given the known species losses over the past few centuries and millennia. Here we review how differences between fossil and modern data and the addition of recently available palaeontological information influence our understanding of the current extinction crisis. Our results confirm that current extinction rates are higher than would be expected from the fossil record, highlighting the need for effective conservation measures.

/pdf/has-the-earth-s-sixth-mass-extinction-already-arrived-dzhs0k1eir.pdf

Has the Earth’s sixth mass extinction already arrived?

The oft-repeated claim that Earth’s biota is entering a sixth “mass extinction” depends on clearly demonstrating that current extinction rates are far above the “background” rates prevailing between the five previous mass extinctions. Earlier estimates of extinction rates have been criticized for using assumptions that might overestimate the severity of the extinction crisis. We assess, using extremely conservative assumptions, whether human activities are causing a mass extinction. First, we use a recent estimate of a background rate of 2 mammal extinctions per 10,000 species per 100 years (that is, 2 E/MSY), which is twice as high as widely used previous estimates. We then compare this rate with the current rate of mammal and vertebrate extinctions. The latter is conservatively low because listing a species as extinct requires meeting stringent criteria. Even under our assumptions, which would tend to minimize evidence of an incipient mass extinction, the average rate of vertebrate species loss over the last century is up to 100 times higher than the background rate. Under the 2 E/MSY background rate, the number of species that have gone extinct in the last century would have taken, depending on the vertebrate taxon, between 800 and 10,000 years to disappear. These estimates reveal an exceptionally rapid loss of biodiversity over the last few centuries, indicating that a sixth mass extinction is already under way. Averting a dramatic decay of biodiversity and the subsequent loss of ecosystem services is still possible through intensified conservation efforts, but that window of opportunity is rapidly closing.

http://biospherology.com/PDF/mass_extinction.pdf

Accelerated modern human-induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction

Background A principal function of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is to “perform regular and timely assessments of knowledge on biodiversity.” In December 2013, its second plenary session approved a program to begin a global assessment in 2015. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and five other biodiversity-related conventions have adopted IPBES as their science-policy interface, so these assessments will be important in evaluating progress toward the CBD’s Aichi Targets of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020. As a contribution toward such assessment, we review the biodiversity of eukaryote species and their extinction rates, distributions, and protection. We document what we know, how it likely differs from what we do not, and how these differences affect biodiversity statistics. Interestingly, several targets explicitly mention “known species”—a strong, if implicit, statement of incomplete knowledge. We start by asking how many species are known and how many remain undescribed. We then consider by how much human actions inflate extinction rates. Much depends on where species are, because different biomes contain different numbers of species of different susceptibilities. Biomes also suffer different levels of damage and have unequal levels of protection. How extinction rates will change depends on how and where threats expand and whether greater protection counters them. Different visualizations of species biodiversity. ( A ) The distributions of 9927 bird species. ( B ) The 4964 species with smaller than the median geographical range size. ( C ) The 1308 species assessed as threatened with a high risk of extinction by BirdLife International for the Red List of Threatened Species of the International Union for Conservation of Nature. ( D ) The 1080 threatened species with less than the median range size. (D) provides a strong geographical focus on where local conservation actions can have the greatest global impact. Additional biodiversity maps are available at www.biodiversitymapping.org. Advances Recent studies have clarified where the most vulnerable species live, where and how humanity changes the planet, and how this drives extinctions. These data are increasingly accessible, bringing greater transparency to science and governance. Taxonomic catalogs of plants, terrestrial vertebrates, freshwater fish, and some marine taxa are sufficient to assess their status and the limitations of our knowledge. Most species are undescribed, however. The species we know best have large geographical ranges and are often common within them. Most known species have small ranges, however, and such species are typically newer discoveries. The numbers of known species with very small ranges are increasing quickly, even in well-known taxa. They are geographically concentrated and are disproportionately likely to be threatened or already extinct. We expect unknown species to share these characteristics. Current rates of extinction are about 1000 times the background rate of extinction. These are higher than previously estimated and likely still underestimated. Future rates will depend on many factors and are poised to increase. Finally, although there has been rapid progress in developing protected areas, such efforts are not ecologically representative, nor do they optimally protect biodiversity. Outlook Progress on assessing biodiversity will emerge from continued expansion of the many recently created online databases, combining them with new global data sources on changing land and ocean use and with increasingly crowdsourced data on species’ distributions. Examples of practical conservation that follow from using combined data in Colombia and Brazil can be found at www.savingspecies.org and www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3zjeJW2NVk.

The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection

If habitat destruction or overexploitation of populations is severe, species loss can occur directly and abruptly. Yet the final descent to extinction is often driven by synergistic processes (amplifying feedbacks) that can be disconnected from the original cause of decline. We review recent observational, experimental and meta-analytic work which together show that owing to interacting and self-reinforcing processes, estimates of extinction risk for most species are more severe than previously recognised. As such, conservation actions which only target single-threat drivers risk being inadequate because of the cascading effects caused by unmanaged synergies. Future work should focus on how climate change will interact with and accelerate ongoing threats to biodiversity, such as habitat degradation, overexploitation and invasive species.

https://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/pdf/S0169-5347(08)00195-X.pdf

Synergies among extinction drivers under global change.

''missing in action,'' not recently recorded in its native habitat that human actions have largely destroyed. This assumption prevents terminating conservation efforts prematurely, even as it again underestimates the total number of extinctions. Finally, rapidly declining species will lose most of their populations and thus their functional roles within ecosystems long before their actual demise (3, 4). We explore the often-unstated assumptions about extinction numbers to understand the various estimates. Starting before 1500 and the period of first human contact with bird species, we consider the estimates in chronological sequence. We continue with the effects of first European contact, the period from 1500 to 1800. Finally, we consider extinctions to the present, proceed to those expected from human impacts to date, and conclude with those expected if human actions continue to expand at their present rate. To estimate extinctions, we calculate the extinction rate as the number of extinctions (E) per year per species or, to make the numbers more reasonable, per million species years (MSY) (ref. 5; see Methods below). Results

/pdf/human-impacts-on-the-rates-of-recent-present-and-future-bird-35im68xc8s.pdf

Human impacts on the rates of recent, present, and future bird extinctions.

Sarcolipin (SLN) inhibits the cardiac sarco(endo)plasmic reticulum Ca2+ ATPase (SERCA2a) by direct binding and is superinhibitory if it binds through phospholamban (PLN). To determine whether overexpression of SLN in the heart might impair cardiac function, transgenic (TG) mice were generated with cardiac-specific overexpression of NF-SLN (SLN tagged at its N terminus with the FLAG epitope). The level of NF-SLN expression (the NF-SLN/PLN expression ratio) was equivalent to that which induces profound superinhibition when coexpressed with PLN and SERCA2a in HEK-293 cells. In TG hearts, the apparent affinity of SERCA2a for Ca2+ was decreased compared with non-TG littermate control hearts. Invasive hemodynamic and echocardiographic analyses revealed impaired cardiac contractility and ventricular hypertrophy in TG mice. Basal PLN phosphorylation was reduced. In isolated papillary muscle subjected to isometric tension, peak amplitudes of Ca2+ transients and peak tensions were reduced, whereas decay times of Ca2+ transients and relaxation times of tension were increased in TG mice. Isoproterenol largely restored contractility in papillary muscle and stimulated PLN phosphorylation to wild-type levels in intact hearts. No compensatory changes in expression of SERCA2a, PLN, ryanodine receptor, and calsequestrin were observed in TG hearts. Coimmunoprecipitation indicated that overexpressed NF-SLN was bound to both SERCA2a and PLN, forming a ternary complex. These data suggest that NF-SLN overexpression inhibits SERCA2a through stabilization of SERCA2a–PLN interaction in the absence of PLN phosphorylation and through the inhibition of PLN phosphorylation. Inhibition of SERCA2a impairs contractility and calcium cycling, but responsiveness to β-adrenergic agonists may prevent progression to heart failure.

https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/101/25/9199.full.pdf

Cardiac-specific overexpression of sarcolipin inhibits sarco(endo)plasmic reticulum Ca2+ ATPase (SERCA2a) activity and impairs cardiac function in mice

Alan Peterson

Papers

Human impacts on the rates of recent, present, and future bird extinctions.

Cardiac-specific overexpression of sarcolipin inhibits sarco(endo)plasmic reticulum Ca2+ ATPase (SERCA2a) activity and impairs cardiac function in mice