-
Evolution of climate niches in European mammals?
-
Our ability to predict consequences of climate change is severely impaired by the lack of knowledge on the ability of species to adapt to changing environmental conditions. We used distribution data for 140 mammal species in Europe, together with data on climate, land cover and topography, to derive a statistical description of their realized climate niche. We then compared climate niche overlap of pairs of species, selected on the basis of phylogenetic information. In contrast to expectations, related species were not similar in their climate niche. Rather, even species pairs that had a common ancestor less than 1Ma already display very high climate niche distances. We interpret our finding as a strong inter- specific competitive constraint on the realized niche, rather than a rapid evolution of the fundamental niche. If correct, our results imply a very limited usefulness of climate niche models for the prediction of future mammal distributions.
Located in
Resources
/
Climate Science Documents
-
Evolution of natural and social science interactions in global change research programs
-
Efforts to develop a global understanding of the functioning of the Earth as a system began in the mid-1980s. This effort necessitated linking knowledge from both the physical and biological realms. A motivation for this development was the growing impact of humans on the Earth system and need to provide solutions, but the study of the social drivers and their consequences for the changes that were occurring was not incorporated into the Earth System Science movement, despite early attempts to do so. The impediments to integration were many, but they are gradually being overcome, which can be seen in many trends for assessments, such as the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, as well as both basic and applied science programs. In this development, particular people and events have shaped the trajectories that have occurred. The lessons learned should be considered in such emerging research programs as Future Earth, the new global program for sustainability research. The transitioning process to this new program will take time as scientists adjust to new colleagues with different ideologies, methods, and tools and a new way of doing science.
Located in
Resources
/
Climate Science Documents
-
Evolutionary history and the effect of biodiversity on plant productivity
-
Loss of biological diversity because of extinction is one of the most pronounced changes to the global environment. For several decades, researchers have tried to understand how changes in biodiversity might impact biomass production by examining how biomass correlates with a number of biodiversity metrics (especially the number of species and functional groups). This body of research has focused on species with the implicit assumption that they are independent entities. However, functional and ecological similarities are shaped by patterns of common ancestry, such that distantly related species might contribute more to production than close relatives, perhaps by increasing niche breadth. Here, we analyze 2 decades of experiments performed in grassland ecosystems throughout the world and examine whether the evolutionary relationships among the species comprising a community predict how biodiversity impacts plant biomass production. We show that the amount of phylogenetic diversity within communities explained significantly more variation in plant community biomass than other measures of diversity, such as the number of species or functional groups. Our results reveal how evolutionary history can provide critical information for understanding, predicting, and potentially ameliorating the effects of biodiversity loss and should serve as an impetus for new biodiversity experiments.
Located in
Resources
/
Climate Science Documents
-
Faustian bargains? Restoration realities in the context of biodiversity offset policies
-
The science and practice of ecological restoration are increasingly being called upon to compensate for the loss of biodiversity values caused by development projects. Biodiversity offsetting—compensating for losses of biodiversity at an impact site by generating ecologically equivalent gains elsewhere—therefore places substantial faith in the ability of restoration to recover lost biodiversity. Furthermore, the increase in offset-led restoration multiplies the consequences of failure to restore, since the promise of effective restoration may increase the chance that damage to biodiversity is permitted. But what evidence exists that restoration science and practice can reliably, or even feasibly, achieve the goal of ‘no net loss’ of biodiversity, and under what circumstances are successes and failures more likely? Using recent reviews of the restoration ecology literature, we examine the effectiveness of restoration as an approach for offsetting biodiversity loss, and conclude that many of the expectations set by current offset policy for ecological restoration remain unsupported by evidence. We introduce a conceptual model that illustrates three factors that limit the technical success of offsets: time lags, uncertainty and measurability of the value being offset. These factors can be managed to some extent through sound offset policy design that incorporates active adaptive management, time discounting, explicit accounting for uncertainty, and biodiversity banking. Nevertheless, the domain within which restoration can deliver ‘no net loss’ offsets remains small. A narrowing of the gap between the expectations set by offset policies and the practice of offsetting is urgently required and we urge the development of stronger links between restoration ecologists and those who make policies that are reliant upon restoration science. Keywords:Compensatory habitat - Conservation policy - Mitigation banking - Environmental risk - No net loss - Restoration success
Located in
Resources
/
Climate Science Documents
-
Fear of failure in conservation: The problem and potential solutions to aid conservation of extremely small populations
-
The potential for extirpation of extremely small populations (ESPs) is high due to their vulnerability to
demographic and environmental stochasticity and negative impacts of human activity. We argue that
conservation actions that could aid ESPs are sometimes delayed because of a fear of failure. In human
psychology, the fear of failure is composed of several distinct cognitive elements, including ‘‘uncertainty
about the future’’ and ‘‘upsetting important others.’’ Uncertainty about the future is often driven by information obstacles in conservation: information is either not easily shared among practitioners or information is lacking. Whereas, fear of upsetting important others can be due to apprehension about angering constituents, peers, funders, and other stakeholders. We present several ways to address these fears in hopes of improving the conservation process. We describe methods for increased information sharing and improved decision-making in the face of uncertainty, and recommend a shift in focus to cooperative actions and improving methods for evaluating success. Our hope is that by tackling stumbling blocks due to the apprehension of failure, conservation and management organizations can take steps to move from fear to action.
Located in
Resources
/
Climate Science Documents
-
Forest biodiversity and Human communities in Honduras
-
Webinar on Forest biodiversity and Human communities in Honduras presented by David King on July 24, 2020.
Located in
Training
/
Videos and Webinars
-
HN Biology Investigation
-
En HN Biology Investigation tenemos la convicción de que la ciencia debe ser accesible para todos. Por lo cual tenemos como meta generar conocimiento por medio del uso de herramientas necesarias para nuestra formación como científicos profesionales. Para lograr lo anterior se imparten cursos y talleres tanto virtuales como presenciales, en campo y laboratorio a costos accesible al publico en general, incluso brindando becas para las personas o instituciones interesadas.
Located in
LP Members
/
Organizations Search
-
How life shaped Earth
-
Earth is much more complex than all the other solar system objects that we know. Thanks to its rich and diverse geology, our planet can offer habitats to a wide range of living species. Emerging insights suggest that this is not just a happy coincidence, but that life itself has in many ways helped to shape the planet. Michael Gross reports.
Located in
Resources
/
Climate Science Documents
-
Hudsonia
-
Since 1981 Hudsonia has conducted environmental research, education, training and technical assistance to protect the natural heritage of the Hudson Valley and neighboring regions. A non-advocacy organization, Hudsonia serves as a neutral voice in the challenging process of land use decision making.
Our work includes education, basic and applied research on rare species and their habitats, wetlands and estuaries, and the study of invasive plants and other threats to biodiversity.
Located in
LP Members
/
Organizations Search
-
Invited Review: Quantifying surface albedo and other direct biogeophysical climate forcings of forestry activities
-
By altering fluxes of heat, momentum, and moisture exchanges between the land surface and atmosphere, forestry and other land-use activities affect climate. Although long recognized scientifically as being important, these so-called biogeophysical forcings are rarely included in climate policies for forestry and other land management projects due to the many challenges associated with their quantification. Here, we review the scientific literature in the fields of atmospheric science and terrestrial ecology in light of three main objectives: (i) to elucidate the challenges associated with quantifying biogeophysical climate forcings connected to land use and land management, with a focus on the forestry sector; (ii) to identify and describe scientific approaches and/or metrics facilitating the quantification and interpretation of direct biogeophysical climate forcings; and (iii) to identify and recommend research priorities that can help overcome the challenges of their attribution to specific land-use activities, bridging the knowledge gap between the climate modeling, forest ecology, and resource management communities. We find that ignoring surface
biogeophysics may mislead climate mitigation policies, yet existing metrics are unlikely to be sufficient. Successful metrics ought to (i) include both radiative and nonradiative climate forcings; (ii) reconcile disparities between biogeophysical and biogeochemical forcings, and (iii) acknowledge trade-offs between global and local climate benefits. We call for more coordinated research among terrestrial ecologists, resource managers, and coupled climate modelers to harmonize datasets, refine analytical techniques, and corroborate and validate metrics that are more amenable to analyses at the scale of an individual site or region.
Located in
Resources
/
Climate Science Documents
