The distributions of many terrestrial organisms are currently shifting in latitude or elevation in response to changing climate Using a meta-analysis, we estimated that the distributions of species have recently shifted to higher elevations at a median rate of 110 meters per decade, and to higher latitudes at a median rate of 169 kilometers per decade These rates are approximately two and three times faster than previously reported The distances moved by species are greatest in studies showing the highest levels of warming, with average latitudinal shifts being generally sufficient to track temperature changes However, individual species vary greatly in their rates of change, suggesting that the range shift of each species depends on multiple internal species traits and external drivers of change Rapid average shifts derive from a wide diversity of responses by individual species

/pdf/rapid-range-shifts-of-species-associated-with-high-levels-of-249w1ca3i9.pdf

Rapid Range Shifts of Species Associated with High Levels of Climate Warming

The global decline in estuarine and coastal ecosystems (ECEs) is affecting a number of critical benefits, or ecosystem services. We review the main ecological services across a variety of ECEs, including marshes, mangroves, nearshore coral reefs, seagrass beds, and sand beaches and dunes. Where possible, we indicate estimates of the key economic values arising from these services, and discuss how the natural variability of ECEs impacts their benefits, the synergistic relationships of ECEs across seascapes, and management implications. Although reliable valuation estimates are beginning to emerge for the key services of some ECEs, such as coral reefs, salt marshes, and mangroves, many of the important benefits of seagrass beds and sand dunes and beaches have not been assessed properly. Even for coral reefs, marshes, and mangroves, important ecological services have yet to be valued reliably, such as cross-ecosystem nutrient transfer (coral reefs), erosion control (marshes), and pollution control (mangroves). An important issue for valuing certain ECE services, such as coastal protection and habitat-fishery linkages, is that the ecological functions underlying these services vary spatially and temporally. Allowing for the connectivity between ECE habitats also may have important implications for assessing the ecological functions underlying key ecosystems services, such coastal protection, control of erosion, and habitat-fishery linkages. Finally, we conclude by suggesting an action plan for protecting and/or enhancing the immediate and longer-term values of ECE services. Because the connectivity of ECEs across land-sea gradients also influences the provision of certain ecosystem services, management of the entire seascape will be necessary to preserve such synergistic effects. Other key elements of an action plan include further ecological and economic collaborative research on valuing ECE services, improving institutional and legal frameworks for management, controlling and regulating destructive economic activities, and developing ecological restoration options.

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1890/10-1510.1

The value of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services

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

In marine ecosystems, rising atmospheric CO2 and climate change are associated with concurrent shifts in temperature, circulation, stratification, nutrient input, oxygen content, and ocean acidification, with potentially wideranging biological effects. Population-level shifts are occurring because of physiological intolerance to new environments, altered dispersal patterns, and changes in species interactions. Together with local climate-driven invasion and extinction, these processes result in altered community structure and diversity, including possible emergence of novel ecosystems. Impacts are particularly striking for the poles and the tropics, because of the sensitivity of polar ecosystems to sea-ice retreat and poleward species migrations as well as the sensitivity of coral-algal symbiosis to minor increases in temperature. Midlatitude upwelling systems, like the California Current, exhibit strong linkages between climate and species distributions, phenology, and demography. Aggregated effects may modify energy and material flows as well as biogeochemical cycles, eventually impacting the overall ecosystem functioning and services upon which people and societies depend.

/pdf/climate-change-impacts-on-marine-ecosystems-mu6opf56n1.pdf

Climate Change Impacts on Marine Ecosystems

The rapid expansion of human activities threatens ocean-wide biodiversity. Numerous marine animal populations have declined, yet it remains unclear whether these trends are symptomatic of a chronic accumulation of global marine extinction risk. We present the first systematic analysis of threat for a globally distributed lineage of 1,041 chondrichthyan fishes—sharks, rays, and chimaeras. We estimate that one-quarter are threatened according to IUCN Red List criteria due to overfishing (targeted and incidental). Large-bodied, shallow-water species are at greatest risk and five out of the seven most threatened families are rays. Overall chondrichthyan extinction risk is substantially higher than for most other vertebrates, and only one-third of species are considered safe. Population depletion has occurred throughout the world's ice-free waters, but is particularly prevalent in the Indo-Pacific Biodiversity Triangle and Mediterranean Sea. Improved management of fisheries and trade is urgently needed to avoid extinctions and promote population recovery.

/pdf/extinction-risk-and-conservation-of-the-world-s-sharks-and-8xn9ghsnr6.pdf

Extinction risk and conservation of the world's sharks and rays

First record of crustose coralline algae diseases in the Red Sea

The Red Sea is a unique environment for corals with a strong environmental gradient characterized by temperature extremes and high salinities, but minimal terrestrial runoff or riverine input and their associated pollution.  Disease surveys were conducted along 22 reefs in the central Red Sea along the Saudi Arabian coast in October 2015, which coincided with a bleaching event.  Our objectives were to 1) document types, prevalence, and distribution of coral diseases in a region with minimal terrestrial input, 2) compare regional differences in diseases and bleaching along a latitudinal gradient of environmental conditions, and 3) use histopathology to characterize disease lesions at the cellular level. Coral reefs of the central Red Sea had a widespread but a surprisingly low prevalence of disease ( 75,750 colonies. Twenty diseases were recorded affecting 16 coral taxa and included black band disease, white syndromes, endolithic hypermycosis, skeletal eroding band, growth anomalies and focal bleached patches. The three most common diseases were Acropora white syndrome (59.1% of the survey sites), Poritesgrowth anomalies (40.9%), and Porites white syndrome (31.8%).  Over half of the coral genera within transects had lesions and corals from the genera Acropora, Millepora and Lobophyllia were the most commonly affected. Cell-associated microbial aggregates were found in four coral genera resembling patterns found in the Indo-Pacific. Differences in disease prevalence, coral cover, amount of heat stress as measured by degree heating weeks (DHW) and extent of bleaching was evident among sites. Disease prevalence was not explained by coral cover or DHW, and a negative relationship between coral bleaching and disease prevalence was found. The northern-most sites off the coast of Yanbu had the highest average DHW values but absence of bleaching and the highest average disease prevalence was recorded. Our study provides a foundation and baseline data for coral disease prevalence in the Red Sea, which is projected to increase as a consequence of increased frequency and severity of ocean warming.

/pdf/a-comparative-baseline-of-coral-disease-across-the-central-tt1tbhl6xn.pdf

A comparative baseline of coral disease across the central Red Sea

Coral colonies in Kāne'ohe Bay, Hawai'i (USA), are afflicted with the tissue loss disease chronic Montipora white syndrome (cMWS). Here we show that removal of chronic disease lesions is a potential method to slow the progression of cMWS in M. capitata. Over the 24 wk observation period, treatment colonies lost almost half the amount of tissue that was lost by control colonies. The percentage of tissue loss at each sampling interval (mean ± SEM; treatment: 1.17 ± 0.47%, control: 2.25 ± 0.63%) and the rate of tissue loss per day (treatment: 0.13 ± 0.04%, control: 0.27 ± 0.08%) were both significantly lower on treated colonies than control colonies. While lesion removal stopped tissue loss at the initial infection site, which allowed colony healing, it did not prevent re-infection; in all but one of the treated colonies, new cMWS lesions appeared in other areas of the colony but not around the treatment margins. Additionally, the rate of new infections was similar between treatment and control colonies, indicating that physical injury from lesion removal did not appear to increase cMWS susceptibility. These results indicate that lesion removal reduced morbidity in M. capitata exhibiting cMWS but did not stop the disease.

/pdf/assessment-of-disease-lesion-removal-as-a-method-to-control-4sfrx28pzs.pdf

Assessment of disease lesion removal as a method to control chronic Montipora white syndrome.

Endemic disease transmission is an important ecological process that is challenging to study because of low occurrence rates. Here, we investigate the ecological drivers of two coral diseases -- growth anomalies and tissue loss -- affecting five coral species. We first show that a statistical framework called the case-control study design, commonly used in epidemiology but rarely applied to ecology, provided high predictive accuracy (67-82%) and disease detection rates (60-83%) compared with a traditional statistical approach that yielded high accuracy (98-100%) but low disease detection rates (0-17%). Using this framework, we found evidence that 1) larger corals have higher disease risk; 2) shallow reefs with low herbivorous fish abundance, limited water motion, and located adjacent to watersheds with high fertilizer and pesticide runoff promote low levels of growth anomalies, a chronic coral disease; and 3) wave exposure, stream exposure, depth, and low thermal stress are associated with tissue loss disease risk during interepidemic periods. Variation in risk factors across host-disease pairs suggests that either different pathogens cause the same gross lesions in different species or that the same disease may arise in different species under different ecological conditions.

/pdf/case-control-design-identifies-ecological-drivers-of-endemic-2exyo3masg.pdf

Greta S. Aeby

Papers

First record of crustose coralline algae diseases in the Red Sea

A comparative baseline of coral disease across the central Red Sea

Assessment of disease lesion removal as a method to control chronic Montipora white syndrome.

Case-control design identifies ecological drivers of endemic coral diseases

The first cyanobacterial infection of crustose coralline algae discovered on the reefs of Pohnpei, Micronesia