A A A

Applying Metabolic Scaling Laws to Predicting Extinction Risk

By Claire Asher, on 25 September 2014

The Earth is warming. That much were are now certain of. A major challenge for scientists hoping to ameliorate the effect of this on biodiversity is to predict how temperature increases will affect populations. Predicting the responses of species living in complex ecosystems and heterogenous environments is a difficult task, but one starting point is to begin understanding how temperature increases affect small, laboratory populations. These populations can be easily controlled, and it is hoped that the lessons learned from laboratory populations can then begin to be generalised and applied to real populations. Recent research from GEE academics attempted to evaluate the predictive power of a simple metabolic model on the extinction risk of single-celled organisms in the lab. Their results indicate that simple scaling rules for temperature, metabolic rate and body size can be extremely useful in predicting the extinction of populations, at least in laboratory conditions.

Current estimates suggest that over the next 100 years we can expect a global temperature rise of between 1.1°C and 6.4°C. This change will not be uniformly distributed across different regions however, with some areas expected to experience warming at twice the global average rate. Temperature is known to be a crucial component in some of the most basic characteristics of life – metabolism, body size, birth, growth and mortality rates. These characteristics have been shown to scale with temperature in an easily predictable way, formalised in the Arrhenius equation. This equation yields a roughly 3/4 scaling rule, so that as temperature increases, metabolism increases around 75% as fast. This relationship appears to hold true for a variety of taxa with different life histories and positions in the food chain. Models based upon this rule can be designed that are very simple, which makes it easy for scientists to collect the data needed to plug into the model. But are they accurate in predicting extinction?

Recent research conducted by GEE and ZSL academics Dr Ben Collen and Prof. Tim Blackburn, in collaboration with the University of Sheffield and The University of Zurich, investigated the predictive power of simple metabolic models on extinction risk in a single-celled protist Loxocephallus. They first collected data on the population and extinction dynamics of a population held at constant temperature. This data was fed into a model based on scaling laws for metabolic rates and temperature, which in turn attempted to predict extinction risk under different temperature changes. The researchers tested how real protists responded to temperature changes – for 70 days they monitored populations of the protist Loxocephallus under either decreases or increases in temperature. Populations began at 20°C and increased to 26°C or decreased to 14°C at different rates (0.5°C, 0.75°C, 1.5°C or 3°C each week). Most populations eventually went extinct, but these extinctions happened sooner in hotter environments, and mean temperature showed a strong correlation with the date at which the population went extinct. Extinction tended to happen sooner in populations subjected to more rapid warming.

None of this is particularly surprising, but what the researchers found when they ran their models was that, even with relatively minimal data to start out with (population dynamics under constant ‘normal’ conditions), and using only simple scaling laws to predict extinction, their model was able to accurately predict when populations would go extinct under different warming or cooling conditions, with an accuracy of 84%. One important factor was the specifics of the temperature changes that were input into the model – using average temperature across the experiment rather than actual temperature changes produced much less accurate results.

This research is a first step in creating models that may help us predict the future extinction dynamics of wild populations subjected to unevenly distributed climatic warming over coming decades. It is a long way from a simple model of a laboratory population to a model that can accurately predict the future of complex assemblages of wild animals that are also subject to predation, disease and a healthy dose of luck. But the fact that these models can work for simple systems in laboratory conditions is a great first start – if they didn’t work for these populations, we could be fairly sure they wouldn’t generalise to natural populations. This shows that simple phenomenological models based on basic metabolic theory can be useful to understand how climate change will effect populations.

Original Article:

nerc-logo-115

This research was made possible by funding from the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC).

Predicting Extinction Risk:
The Importance of Life History and Demography

By Claire Asher, on 28 July 2014

The changing climate is no longer simply a concern for the future, it is a reality. Understanding how the biodiversity that we share our planet with will respond to climate change is a key step in developing long-term strategies to conserve it. Recent research by UCL CBER’s Dr Richard Pearson identifies the key characteristics that are likely to influence extinction risk due to climate change, and shows that existing conservation indicators such as the IUCN red list may contain the data necessary to make these predictions.

Human activities have been negatively impacting biodiversity for centuries, and conservationists have developed a number of different indicator lists which attempt to classify species’ extinction risk. However, these lists were created to measure human impacts such as as habitat loss, hunting and introduction of invasive species. These impacts will continue to be a major issue for biodiversity, but may be dwarfed in the future as climate change takes hold. Can the indices and data we already have be used to predict extinction risk from climate change? Or does climate change represent a new type of threat, needing new indices?

Studies have previously identified the ecological and biological traits that are characteristic of threatened or declining species. However, it is not clear how well these traits predict the future risk of climate-induced extinction. In February this year, GEE’s Dr Richard Pearson, in collaboration with colleagues at the American Museum of Natural History, Stony Brook University and the University of Adelaide, published a paper in Nature which attempted to address these questions. Most studies that have considered the impact of climate change on species’ extinctions have attempted to predict changes in the distribution of suitable habitats and measure extinction risk in terms of whether the species is likely to be able to find habitat to live in. However, such studies rarely consider how a species’ traits such as life history and spatial characteristics will influence their ability to persist through changes in climate. In this study, Pearson and colleagues coupled ecological niche models with demographic models, and developed a generic life history method to estimate extinction risk over the coming century.

Modelling Extinction
The authors then tested their models on ecological and spatial traits for 36 reptile and amphibian species in the USA. Using commonly available life history variables, they found that their models could accurately predict extinction risk between 2000 and 2010. They then utilised the same traits and models to predict future extinction risk under two climate models – a high emissions scenario and a policy scenario aimed at curbing emissions. Average extinction risk for the 36 species studied was 28% under the high emissions scenario, dropping to 23% under strict policy intervention. This seems like a very small difference for a significant intervention – it’s important to note that the same estimates indicated an average extinction risk of just 1% in the absence of any climate change at all.

One of the most important determinants of extinction risk in reptiles and amphibians was occupied area, which represents the range of climatic and habitat conditions the species can survive in. Species with a larger occupied area tended to be more robust to climate change, presumably because they are already adapted to a wider range of habitats and climates. Other key variables influencing extinction risk include population size and generation length. In many cases, traits interacted to determine species risk, for example extinction risk was strongly influenced by interactions between occupied area and generation length. Including many different traits can therefore greatly improve the accuracy of predictions. Recent trends tended to be less informative than spatial, demographic and life history traits, particularly under the high emissions scenario, suggesting that the impacts of climate change we have observed so far are likely to become less and less relevant as climate change accelerates.

The majority of variables that showed a significant impact on extinction risk are already included in major conservation assessments and indices, meaning that data and monitoring programs already in place may be better at predicting extinction risk under climate change than we might have expected. Climate change may not be fundamentally different from other human threats such as habitat loss and hunting, at least in terms of our ability to assess extinction risk. Conservation initiatives should focus on species who currently occupy a small and declining area and have a small population size. Regardless of the policy future, conservation actions will need to consider and account for climate change if they are to prove effective.

Original Article:

() Life History and Spatial Traits Predict Extinction Risk Due to Climate Change Nature

Nasa-logoARC

This research was made possible by funding from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Australian Research Council

Finding a Place to Call Home:
Translocation and the Plight of the Hihi

By Claire Asher, on 16 May 2014

Climate change alters how climate is distributed both geographically and temporally. Over the coming decades, for species sensitive to climatic variables, it may become a case of ‘relocate or die’ – those species that are not able to shift their populations from old, unsuitable habitat into newly emerging suitable habitat, in line with climate change, will likely go extinct. Conservationists can provide a helping hand to species in this position, however – translocation programs aim to establish populations in appropriate habitat when the species is unlikely to reach it on their own. Determining whether translocations are likely to be necessary in the future, what populations to move and where to move them are complex questions to answer, however. Recent work by researchers at the Institute of Zoology (part of the Center for Ecology and Evolution and affiliated with UCL’s GEE department) developed a framework for understanding species’ relationships with climate and identifying potential translocation sites which will provide suitable habitat through future climate change. For one of New Zealand’s endemic birds, the Hihi, translocation to sites further south may be it’s best chance of long-term survival.

Hihi, endangered bird endemic to New Zealand

The climate is changing. Changes in temperature, rainfall and seasonality are occurring globally, and we are already measuring the effects on wildlife. Often, conditions are shifting geographically, and many species will find that their current range no longer overlaps with any suitable habitat (human land-use change isn’t helping!). In these cases, some species will be able to shift their ranges to account for this, but many species will be unable to do change quickly enough to keep up and instead face extinction. Humans can intervene here by moving endangered species to more suitable habitat, but translocation is expensive and it is crucial to select the new location carefully if the population is to have a chance of succeeding. IoZ researchers set out to develop a statistical framework for determining suitable translocation habitat, using one of New Zealands most endearing but endangered endemics, the Hihi (Notiomystis cincta), to test the framework.

The population of Hihis in Tiritiri Mantangi island offers a special opportunity to study the direct effects of climate change without other variables such as food ability confounding the results. This is because they have been provided supplementary food for nearly two decades. Using data on the reproductive success of females in this population, combined with climate data, Dr Aliénor Chauvenet and Dr Nathalie Pettorelli from the Institute of Zoology, along with colleagues at Imperial College London and Massey University in New Zealand, were able to show that Hihi populations are effected by the climate even when food availability is removed from the equation.

Next, using mathematical modelling, the authors tried to predict the future of Hihi populations, using different simulated changes in climate based upon the variables that were found to be most important in influencing current Hihi populations on Tiritiri Mantangi. Changes in temperature, as well as increases in climate variability had a significant influence on the survival of simulated Hihi populations. The final step was to again use mathematical modelling to predict and map suitable Hihi habitat both now, and in the future. Again, this modelling showed that current Hihi populations are most strongly influenced by temperature, a key variable in determining habitat suitability, with rainfall as another important influence.

Looking forward, under models of predicted future climate change, suitable Hihi habitat is expected to move south. The north of New Zealand, which currently offers highly suitable habitat, is predicted to become almost entirely unsuitable over the next few decades. The most successful reintroduced population of Hihis, as well as the largest and last remaining natural Hihi population both stand to lose suitable habitat by 2050. New suitable habitat is expected to emerge in the southern end of the North Island, as well as the northern part of the South Island, where historically conditions have not been suitable for Hihis.

Because Hihis show population declines as temperatures warm even when we control for food availability, even careful management of existing population may prove ineffective under future climate change. Instead, translocation may provide the only solution to guarantee the long-term survival of the Hihi in New Zealand. Although translocations traditionally perform the role of reintroduction – returning a species to part of it’s historical range – future plans for endangered species like the Hihi need to take climate change into consideration. We should opt for ‘assisted colonisation’ – introducing populations to new habitat that is likely to persist (and perhaps even become more suitable) through future climate change. In this way we can attempt to ‘future-proof’ our conservation efforts and hopefully ensure the survival of many species which might otherwise go extinct as the climate changes.

Original Article:

() Journal of Applied Ecology

This research was made possible by funding from AXA Research and Research Councils UK .

The Delicate Balance of Effect and Response

By Claire Asher, on 18 February 2014

We may not always be aware of it, but many wild plants, animals, fungi and even bacteria, provide crucial services to us which keep the ecosystems of Earth functioning. Environmental changes caused by human activities are now threatening many species, and those that cannot withstand these changes may be lost forever, potentially taking the services they provide away. New research from GEE and collaborators worldwide aims to improve our understanding of how the traits and evolutionary histories of species influence their ability to provide essential ecosystem services, and to persist in the face of ongoing environmental change.

The diverse array of species we share planet Earth with, and the complex ecosystems they form, are crucial to our continued survival and well being. Species and ecosystems provide a huge number of ‘ecosystem services’ – functions such as nutrient cycling, waste decomposition, pollination and food, to name just a few, which humans rely on. However, many species are now under threat from human activities like deforestation, hunting and pollution. Scientists are working to understand how species and ecosystems will respond to our continued activities in the future, and particularly how this may effect the vital ecosystem services upon which we rely. Recent research by GEE’s Prof. Georgina Mace, in collaboration with researchers from Cordoba National Univerity, Imperial College London, VU University, Yale University and CSIC, has attempted to develop a new framework for risk assessing the effect of human activities on ecosystem services.

The framework considers two key aspects of species: their effect on the generation of a specific ecosystem service (e.g. seed dispersal), and their response to specific environmental pressures (e.g. drought). Both the effect of a species and the response of a species are underpinned by its traits, and each is influenced not by a single trait but a combination of traits. The response of a species will determine it’s ability to survive and flourish through future environmental changes and to continue to provide it’s ecosystem effects. However, only a species’ response is the subject of natural selection, via changes to the underlying traits; the effect of a species is merely a biproduct of traits selected for their influence on survival. In this way, the aspects of a species’ biology upon which we rely are only indirectly influenced by natural selection, and will only be maintained if the traits that generate them are beneficial through the environmental changes we cause. The framework developed by GEE researchers and collaborators considers how the response of species to envinmental stressors interacts with the effect of that species on key ecosystem services, and whether species with a large effect are more or less vulnerable to environmental change.

A third key factor influencing the sensitivity of ecosystem system services is the evolutionary relationships between species providing them. Closely related species often share similar traits, which may or may not result in them having similar effects and responses. If this is the case, then ecosystems in which a particular service is provided by a group of closely related species may be more vulnerable to environmental change, since those species may well share similar responses, and be sensitive to similar environmental pressures. Although many species’ traits are known to be similar amongst related species, because effects and responses are each the result of a combination of traits, it is not known whether this relationship is also common for these variables.

The new framework developed by GEE’s Professor Georgina Mace and collaborators attempts to address this by incorporating evolutionary relationships (phylogeny) into their response-effect model, and applying this model to 5 case studies. The case studies cover 5 species assemblages including a total of 480 species in Europe, Central America and Africa, for which response and effects could be estimated based on past studies of species’ traits and vulnerabilities. The case studies tended to show a strong relationship between phylogeny and both species’ effects on ecosystem services and their responses to environmental stressors. This indeed suggests that ecosystem services that rely upon closely related groups of species may be most at risk from environmental change. Cases where effects and responses are negatively correlated, so that the most influential species in terms of a given ecosystem service are also the most vulnerable to environmental stress, are most vulnerable to loss of that ecosystem service through human activities. Whether this type of relationship is common in nature remains to be investigated by future studies, and this framework provides a powerful basis with which to do so.

Our relentless demands on the natural world are inevitably leading to new pressures and stresses on natural populations, and it is of great concern that these pressures may negatively impact on the vital ecosystem services that we rely upon, often without even realising it. Ecosystem services provide us with food and fresh water, decompose our waste, recycle nutrients and remove harmful toxins. Without them our continued survival and well being would be seriously compromised. Scientists are still working to understand how species’ traits influence their ability to provide ecosystem services and their resilience to ongoing environmmental change. A new framework developed in collaboration between universities in the UK, Spain, Argentina, the USA and the Netherlands is beginning to shed light on the interaction between species’ traits, their effect on ecosystem services and their response to environmental change, and how these factors are influenced by evolutionary relationships between species. This framework offers a powerful new view of how the traits of species within an ecosystem translate into the ecosystem services upon which we are so reliant, and future research building upon this framework promises to improve our understanding of ecosystem services and environmental change.

Original Article:

() Ecology and Evolution



This research was made possible by funding from the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), the Leverhulme Trust, and the US National Science Foundation

The Global Future of Consumption

By Claire Asher, on 30 August 2013

The ever-growing human population, our increasing consumption of natural resources and our environmental impact, are a major concern. However, population growth and consumption varies dramatically from country to country and therefore our predictions of what the future may hold are also likely to differ between nations. Recent research in GEE used mathematical models of different population scenarios over the next 100 years to investigate the relative importance of curbing consumption and population growth.

In 1800, the global human population reached 1 billion, and by 2011 it had soured to seven times that. Although population growth is now slowing, current UN projections suggest that we will have reached 10 billion by 2080. Meanwhile, lifespan has tripled in the last thousand years while reproductive output (number of children) has halved worldwide, meaning many regions now have aging populations. However, there is considerable variation in this between countries and regions. In particular, developing nations tend to have higher mortality and higher birth rate. As countries develop and mortality decreases, they undergo what is known as the ‘demographic transition’, moving towards a lower birth rate as is observed in developed nations now.

As population size increases, so do our demands on the environment. We are now undergoing global climate change, environmental pollution and loss of species, although these magnitude of these changes is heterogeneous across the globe. In general, while birth rate tends to decrease with population size, consumption per capita increases. This pattern is not sustainable, and resources are becoming an increasingly limiting factor for development, especially to the world’s poorest nations. Reduced pressure on the environment can only be achieved through either reducing the number of people, or reducing the consumption of resources per person. Reductions in population growth rate or consumption may therefore be able to mitigate these effects over coming decades, however the effects of changes in birth rate, demography, consumption and efficiency are unlikely to be uniform across the developed and developing world. To investigate this, Professor Georgina Mace and Dr Emma Terama from UCL and Professor Tim Coulson from the University of Oxford modelled consumption in the USA and India over the next 100 years under different scenarios. Reductions in both birth rate and emissions are needed to stabilise global consumption over the next century. A 1% reduction in both birth rate and C02 emissions over the next 50 years would be sufficient to achieve stability, however the impact of different scenarios varied between developed (USA) and developing (India) countries. In particular, short-term benefits are associated with reducing consumption in high income countries such as the USA, but long-term gains can be achieved through early reductions in population growth in developing countries.

The effect of changes in population growth are slow to become apparent, especially in young populations where there can be a considerable lag. However, early reductions in population growth yield substantial benefits in the long-term. By contrast, reductions in individual consumption in high-income countries can have a very rapid impact on national consumption, and may be easier to achieve in countries fitting this profile. Steps to reduce consumption now in countries such as the USA and the UK may be important in securing long-term global sustainability.

The world’s resources are rapidly becoming a limiting factor for our growing population. Reductions in per capita consumption, achieved through lower consumption or improved efficiency from technological innovations, can yield immediate benefits in reducing environmental pressures in developed countries. By contrast, long-term benefits can be gained through early reductions in population growth in developing countries. Understanding the dynamics of growth and consumption in relation to current and future development and demography is crucial if we are to plan for the future and act to minimise our impact on the global environment.

Original Article:

() Environmental and Resource Economics

Biological Traits Influence Vulnerability to Climate Change in Birds, Amphibians and Corals

By Claire Asher, on 25 June 2013

Climate change is fast becoming a reality, and with temperature rises of between 0.8°C and 2.6°C predicted over the next 35 years, biodiversity will certainly be impacted, with many species set to suffer declines or potential extinction. But all species are not equal and certain traits may make species more or less vulnerable to climate change than others. A new model presented in PLOS one this month investigates the impact of biological traits, such as physiology, ecology and evolutionary history, on vulnerability to climate change for some of the most threatened groups: birds, amphibians and corals. Around 10% of species are both highly vulnerable to climate change, and already listed as threatened with extinction. The model also identifies potentially vulnerable species for future conservation priorities, giving biologists a head-start in trying to slow the inevitable loss of biodiversity that climate change will bring.

Many researchers are interested in predicting how biodiversity might respond to climate change. Biodiversity is essential to human survival – diverse, functional ecosystems provide us with food, water and medicine. However, predicting how ecosystems might respond to changes in temperature and rainfall is a complicated matter. Most previous models have considered the availability of suitable habitat for species based upon their current range and predictions of temperature changes. However, not all species are created equal – biological traits of individual species are likely to play an important role in determining species survival. For example, some species are adapted to a very specialised habitat or are poor as dispersal and so may struggle to find alternative habitats even if they are available. Other species have long generation times and produce few young, or have very limited genetic diversity in the population, making adaptation to new habitats more difficult. Species like these are likely to be more vulnerable to climate change than generalists who are good at dispersal and produce lots of offspring. Not considering the biology of a species when modelling responses to climate change can lead to under- or over-estimations of how vulnerable a species actually is.

Accounting for Biology
To address this issue, Foden and colleagues, working in collaboration with Professor Georgina Mace from CBER, developed a systematic framework for assessing species vulnerability to climate change, and applied this model to three of the best-studied, and most endangered groups of animals: birds, amphibians and corals. They considered three factors – sensitivity (whether a species can survive where it is), exposure (the predicted extent of change under climate models), and adaptive capacity (whether a species can avoid the negative impacts of climate change by moving or evolving).

The components of species vulnerability - sensitivity, adaptive capacity and exposure

Components of species
vulnerability – sensitivity, adaptive
capacity and exposure

In consultation with extinction risk specialists, they identified 90 biological, ecological, phsyiolocial and environmental traits which are likely to influence vulnerability to climate change. In particular, they identified habitat specialisation, rarity, environmental tolerance, disruption of environmental triggers and interactions with other species as key components of species sensitivity to climate change. Adaptive capacity is composed of dispersal ability, barriers to dispersal, genetic diversity, generation length and reproductive output. They assessed these traits for each of 16,857 species of bird, amphibian and coral, across the globe.

The proportion of species in a region that are sensitive or have limited adaptive capacity (blue), high exposure to climate change (yellow) or both (maroon).

The proportion of species in a region that are sensitive or have limited adaptive capacity (blue), high exposure to climate change (yellow) or both (maroon).

Armed with these traits, they were able to determine sensitivity, adaptive capacity and exposure for each species, and generated maps of where species may be particularly vulnerable. They found that around 24% – 50% of bird species, 22% – 44% of amphibians and 15% – 32% of corals are both sensitive and exposed, and have limited capacity to adapt. They identified the Amazon region as containing many highly vulnerable birds and amphibians. Many bird species were also highly vulnerable in central Eurasia, the Congo basin, the Himalayas, Malaysia and Indonesia, with amphibians most vulnerable in north Africa, eastern Russia, and the northern Andes. The waters around Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines were hot-spots for highly vulnerable corals.

A Silver Lining
It’s not all doom and gloom, though. The study also identified some species and regions where species’ traits may make them more able to cope with climate change. Around 28% -53% of bird species, 23% – 59% of amphibians and 30% – 55% of corals may survive projected climate changes because of their inherent ability to disperse or adapt to change. In particular, southern Asia and North America may see less severe biodiversity declines than previously thought.

The interplay between climate change and biodiversity is complex, and unlikely to be uniform across taxonomic groups. It is important to consider the physiological, ecological and evolutionary traits of individual species when making predictions about the impact of climate change. This study considered the effects of temperature and rainfall changes, as well as ocean acidification and sea-level rise, on global biodiversity. However, many other factors will influence whether species survive over the long-term – habitat destruction, invasive species and pollution are also major drivers of extinction which need to be taken into account when predicting the future of a species. Taking into account the biology of a species, and it’s interaction with other species, is a major step forward in our understanding of how biodiversity will respond to the impending climate changes that are now inevitable.

Original Article:

This research was made possible by funding from the MacArthur Foundation.