Extinction risk from climate change
University of Leeds1, University of Cambridge2, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds3, Macquarie University4, Durham University5, University of the Witwatersrand6, Conservation International7, Stellenbosch University8, World Conservation Monitoring Centre9, National Autonomous University of Mexico10, University of Kansas11, James Cook University12
TL;DR: Estimates of extinction risks for sample regions that cover some 20% of the Earth's terrestrial surface show the importance of rapid implementation of technologies to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and strategies for carbon sequestration.
Abstract: Climate change over the past approximately 30 years has produced numerous shifts in the distributions and abundances of species and has been implicated in one species-level extinction. Using projections of species' distributions for future climate scenarios, we assess extinction risks for sample regions that cover some 20% of the Earth's terrestrial surface. Exploring three approaches in which the estimated probability of extinction shows a power-law relationship with geographical range size, we predict, on the basis of mid-range climate-warming scenarios for 2050, that 15-37% of species in our sample of regions and taxa will be 'committed to extinction'. When the average of the three methods and two dispersal scenarios is taken, minimal climate-warming scenarios produce lower projections of species committed to extinction ( approximately 18%) than mid-range ( approximately 24%) and maximum-change ( approximately 35%) scenarios. These estimates show the importance of rapid implementation of technologies to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and strategies for carbon sequestration.
Citations
More filters
Book•
01 Aug 2007
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present 24 chapters of a book containing 24 authors' interviews with the authors of this book, including the authors' authorship, authorship and authorship history.
Abstract: This book contains 24 chapters. Please see Alternative Location for URL/Links to individual chapters.
202 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors used counts of waders (Charadrii) collected from ca. 3500 sites over 30 years and covering a major portion of western Europe, to show that faunal abundance is influenced by climate in winter.
Abstract: Detecting coherent signals of climate change is best achieved by conducting expansive, long-term studies. Here, using counts of waders (Charadrii) collected from ca. 3500 sites over 30 years and covering a major portion of western Europe, we present the largest-scale study to show that faunal abundance is influenced by climate in winter. We demonstrate that the 'weighted centroids' of populations of seven species of wader occurring in internationally important numbers have undergone substantial shifts of up to 115 km, generally in a northeasterly direction. To our knowledge, this shift is greater than that recorded in any other study, but closer to what would be expected as a result of the spatial distribution of ecological zones. We establish that year-to-year changes in site abundance have been positively correlated with concurrent changes in temperature, but that this relationship is most marked towards the colder extremities of the birds' range, suggesting that shifts have occurred as a result of range expansion and that responses to climate change are temperature dependent. Many attempts to model the future impacts of climate change on the distribution of organisms, assume uniform responses or shifts throughout a species' range or with temperature, but our results suggest that this may not be a valid approach. We propose that, with warming temperatures, hitherto unsuitable sites in northeastern Europe will host increasingly important wader numbers, but that this may not be matched by declines elsewhere within the study area. The need to establish that such changes are occurring is accentuated by the statutory importance of this taxon in the designation of protected areas.
202 citations
Cites background from "Extinction risk from climate change..."
...Furthermore, although there are fewer studies that attempt to model future rather than document past distribution shifts, there are those that do, and one of the most commonly used techniques is the ‘climate-envelope approach’ (e.g. Berry et al., 2002; Thomas et al., 2004; Harrison et al., 2006)....
[...]
...…extremities of species ranges mirror those occurring at the warmer margins such that the same ‘climate-space’ is occupied (e.g. Berry et al., 2002; Thomas et al., 2004; Harrison et al., 2006), or attempt to project forwards from current relationships, thus assuming that temperature-responses…...
[...]
...Studies that attempt to predict future distributions and abundances of organisms often assume that changes at the colder extremities of species ranges mirror those occurring at the warmer margins such that the same ‘climate-space’ is occupied (e.g. Berry et al., 2002; Thomas et al., 2004; Harrison et al., 2006), or attempt to project forwards from current relationships, thus assuming that temperature-responses are not temperature-dependent (Roy et al....
[...]
TL;DR: This article analyzed the interactions among habitat shifts, landscape structure and demography for a number of species, using a combination of models, to identify which species are threatened by climate change presents special problems and uncertainties, especially for shorter-lived species.
Abstract: Recent attempts at projecting climate change impacts on biodiversity have used the IUCN Red List Criteria to obtain estimates of extinction rates based on projected range shifts. In these studies, the Criteria are often misapplied, potentially introducing substantial bias and uncertainty. These misapplications include arbitrary changes to temporal and spatial scales; confusion of the spatial variables; and assume a linear relationship between abundance and range area. Using the IUCN Red List Criteria to identify which species are threatened by climate change presents special problems and uncertainties, especially for shorter-lived species. Responses of most species to future climate change are not understood well enough to estimate extinction risks based solely on climate change scenarios and projections of shifts and/or reductions in range areas. One way to further such understanding would be to analyze the interactions among habitat shifts, landscape structure and demography for a number of species, using a combination of models. Evaluating the patterns in the results might allow the development of guidelines for assigning species to threat categories, based on a combination of life history parameters, characteristics of the landscapes in which they live, and projected range changes.
201 citations
Cites background or methods or result from "Extinction risk from climate change..."
...For example, Thomas et al. (2004) obtained comparable estimates of the proportion of species committed to extinction using an approach based on species-area relationships....
[...]
...For example, Thomas et al. (2004) use time scales of 50 years [for Critically Endangered (CR) and Endangered (EN)] and 100 years [for Vulnerable (VU)] to assess declines in future ranges of species, stating that the original time scales ‘are not suited to evaluate the consequences of slow-acting…...
[...]
...In the case of Thomas et al. (2004), the results are likely to have been conservative (underestimating potentially threatened species, because the thresholds r 2006 The Authors Journal compilation r 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Global Change Biology, 12, 2037–2043 for EOO are higher than those…...
[...]
...In this paper, we focus on a different problematic aspect of this approach: that of linking the results of bioclimatic models (shifts and reductions in species’ ranges) to extinction rates, using an approach loosely based on the IUCN Red List Criteria (IUCN, 2001), as has been carried out in a number of recent publications (Thomas et al., 2004; Bomhard et al., 2005; Shoo et al., 2005a; Thuiller et al., 2005)....
[...]
...…models (shifts and reductions in species’ ranges) to extinction rates, using an approach loosely based on the IUCN Red List Criteria (IUCN, 2001), as has been carried out in a number of recent publications (Thomas et al., 2004; Bomhard et al., 2005; Shoo et al., 2005a; Thuiller et al., 2005)....
[...]
TL;DR: McLachlan et al. as mentioned in this paper framed the debate around two considerations (perception of risk and confidence in ecological understanding) that can be construed to generate an axis or continuum from scientists who would strongly support assisted migration to those who would oppose it.
Abstract: With global climate change looming large in the public psyche, the recent paper by McLachlan et al. (2007) and its popular accompaniment (Fox 2007) are timely indeed. Of course some conservation biologists will not wish to think about the prospect of actively moving species that are threatened with extinction by climate change. For them this would be almost analogous to handing out placebos in the midst of an epidemic and worse yet, these placebos may have serious unintended consequences if translocated species become invasive. They will probably argue that we should focus almost exclusively on two central roles for conservation biology: (1) facilitating natural range shifts by redoubling efforts to maintain or restore large-scale connectivity (Hunter et al. 1988; Hannah et al. 2002) and (2) working with our fellow environmental professionals to avoid carbon-management solutions that will have unacceptable consequences for biodiversity (e.g., by directing biofuel production away from sites that would involve the conversion of native vegetation into fuel farms; Cook & Beyea 2000). These two roles will be very demanding, but I believe we should allocate a small portion of our attention to the issue of assisted colonization that McLachlan et al. (2007) have brought to the fore. McLachlan et al. propose framing the debate around two considerations—perception of risk and confidence in ecological understanding—that can be construed to generate an axis or continuum from scientists who would strongly support assisted colonization to those who would oppose it. I think it is useful to advance this exercise by considering three issues that can also be construed as continua: species that are more or less acceptable to translocate, sites that are more or less acceptable for receiving translocations, and projects that are more or less acceptable because of their socioeconomic ramifications and feasibility. I have used the term assisted colonization in contrast to assisted migration used by McLachlan et al.
201 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the combined effects of global climate change and elevated CO 2 concentrations were investigated in the edible crab (Carcus pagurus) during a progressive warming scenario from 10 to 22°C and cooling back to 10°C.
201 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: A ‘silver bullet’ strategy on the part of conservation planners, focusing on ‘biodiversity hotspots’ where exceptional concentrations of endemic species are undergoing exceptional loss of habitat, is proposed.
Abstract: Conservationists are far from able to assist all species under threat, if only for lack of funding. This places a premium on priorities: how can we support the most species at the least cost? One way is to identify 'biodiversity hotspots' where exceptional concentrations of endemic species are undergoing exceptional loss of habitat. As many as 44% of all species of vascular plants and 35% of all species in four vertebrate groups are confined to 25 hotspots comprising only 1.4% of the land surface of the Earth. This opens the way for a 'silver bullet' strategy on the part of conservation planners, focusing on these hotspots in proportion to their share of the world's species at risk.
24,867 citations
"Extinction risk from climate change..." refers background in this paper
...Second, for cerrado vegetation in Brazil, high rates of habitat destructio...
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present an overview of the climate system and its dynamics, including observed climate variability and change, the carbon cycle, atmospheric chemistry and greenhouse gases, and their direct and indirect effects.
Abstract: Summary for policymakers Technical summary 1. The climate system - an overview 2. Observed climate variability and change 3. The carbon cycle and atmospheric CO2 4. Atmospheric chemistry and greenhouse gases 5. Aerosols, their direct and indirect effects 6. Radiative forcing of climate change 7. Physical climate processes and feedbacks 8. Model evaluation 9. Projections of future climate change 10. Regional climate simulation - evaluation and projections 11. Changes in sea level 12. Detection of climate change and attribution of causes 13. Climate scenario development 14. Advancing our understanding Glossary Index Appendix.
13,366 citations
TL;DR: A diagnostic fingerprint of temporal and spatial ‘sign-switching’ responses uniquely predicted by twentieth century climate trends is defined and generates ‘very high confidence’ (as laid down by the IPCC) that climate change is already affecting living systems.
Abstract: Causal attribution of recent biological trends to climate change is complicated because non-climatic influences dominate local, short-term biological changes. Any underlying signal from climate change is likely to be revealed by analyses that seek systematic trends across diverse species and geographic regions; however, debates within the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reveal several definitions of a 'systematic trend'. Here, we explore these differences, apply diverse analyses to more than 1,700 species, and show that recent biological trends match climate change predictions. Global meta-analyses documented significant range shifts averaging 6.1 km per decade towards the poles (or metres per decade upward), and significant mean advancement of spring events by 2.3 days per decade. We define a diagnostic fingerprint of temporal and spatial 'sign-switching' responses uniquely predicted by twentieth century climate trends. Among appropriate long-term/large-scale/multi-species data sets, this diagnostic fingerprint was found for 279 species. This suite of analyses generates 'very high confidence' (as laid down by the IPCC) that climate change is already affecting living systems.
9,761 citations
"Extinction risk from climate change..." refers background in this paper
...gif" NDATA ITEM> ]> Climate change over the past ∼30 years has produced numerous shifts in the distributions and abundances of specie...
[...]
University of Buenos Aires1, University of Alaska Fairbanks2, University of Chile3, University of California, Berkeley4, Environmental Defense Fund5, National Autonomous University of Mexico6, Technische Universität München7, New Mexico State University8, Duke University9, Arizona State University10, University of Notre Dame11, Stanford University12, Colorado State University13, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation14
TL;DR: This study identified a ranking of the importance of drivers of change, aranking of the biomes with respect to expected changes, and the major sources of uncertainties in projections of future biodiversity change.
Abstract: Scenarios of changes in biodiversity for the year 2100 can now be developed based on scenarios of changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide, climate, vegetation, and land use and the known sensitivity of biodiversity to these changes. This study identified a ranking of the importance of drivers of change, a ranking of the biomes with respect to expected changes, and the major sources of uncertainties. For terrestrial ecosystems, land-use change probably will have the largest effect, followed by climate change, nitrogen deposition, biotic exchange, and elevated carbon dioxide concentration. For freshwater ecosystems, biotic exchange is much more important. Mediterranean climate and grassland ecosystems likely will experience the greatest proportional change in biodiversity because of the substantial influence of all drivers of biodiversity change. Northern temperate ecosystems are estimated to experience the least biodiversity change because major land-use change has already occurred. Plausible changes in biodiversity in other biomes depend on interactions among the causes of biodiversity change. These interactions represent one of the largest uncertainties in projections of future biodiversity change.
8,401 citations
Book•
26 May 1995TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a hierarchical dynamic puzzle to understand the relationship between habitat diversity and species diversity and the evolution of the relationships between habitats diversity and diversity in evolutionary time.
Abstract: Preface 1 The road ahead 2 Patterns in space 3 Temporal patterns 4 Dimensionless patterns 5 Speciation 6 Extinction 7 Evolution of the relationship between habitat diversity and species diversity 8 Species-area curves in ecological time 9 Species-area curves in evolutionary time 10 Paleobiological patterns 11 Other patterns with dynamic roots 12 Energy flow and diversity 13 A hierarchical dynamic puzzle References Index
4,812 citations