近期和长远时段内北极生态系统结构受到的影响

生物在物种水平上对全球气候变暖和紫外线B(UV-B)辐射增强的反应受到其群落内其他物种以及生态系统内养分循环的调节,所有的这些反应将会导致生态系统结构的变化.根据高纬度地区坏境因子的可能变化而做的控制试验表明,由夏季变暖而引起苔原植被的变化要小于增加施肥而引起的变化,试验涉及的某些环境因子对北极生态系统的结构有非常强烈地影响,但是这些影响因地区而异,观测结果表明,处于最寒冷地区的植物群落和无脊椎动物群落对全球气候变暖和紫外线B辐射的增强反应最为强烈.尽管微生物量和养分储存量相对稳定,北极无脊椎动物群落还是很可能会对全球变暖产生迅速的反应.试验结果显示,加强紫外线B辐射会改变革兰氏阴性细菌和真菌的群落组成结构,但不会对植物群落的组成产生影响.由夏季气温升高而提高的植物生产力将会控制食物网的动态变化,以苔原植被和亚极地森林植物为基础的食物网中的营养流动会明显地影响到几种优势动物种群数量的周期性波动,在某些年分这些动物的种群数量会达到峰值.小型啮齿动物和食叶昆虫如秋毛虫种群数量的周期性变化则会影响苔原和森林苔原植物的组成结构和多样性,同时也会影响到一些专性捕食者和寄生虫的变化.在暖冬,雪表形成冰壳可能会减少旅鼠的植物食物来源,然而较深的雪也可以使它们免受雪地表面上捕食者对它们的捕食.在芬诺斯堪的亚地区,已有证据表明小型啮齿类动物群落结构和种群动态的显著变化会导致专门以小型啮齿类动物为食物的捕食者的数量减少.气候还可能改变昆虫在白桦森林生态系统中的作用,因为暖冬可以增加这些昆虫卵的成活率,并且扩大其分布范围.此外,在夏季困扰驯鹿的昆虫会由于夏季气候的变暖而扩大其分布范围、增加种群数量并且种群更为活跃;同时在另一方面也会对驯鹿不利,即那些昔日驯鹿/北美驯鹿的避难场所--冰川和未融的成片的雪--在这样温暖的夏季则可能会消失.     

将高纬度地区生态系统的反馈与恢复力引入公司决策

本文讨论了在高纬度地区公司所起的作用,它被概念化为以社会和经济为媒介的生态系统,同时指出了商业环境里其他的一些重要的社会参与者.我们列举了高纬地区企业行为的三个案例并对其中各种共性进行了讨论.特别的,我们认为有必要对商业理论和实践进行革新,以使其不只是停留在社会与经济概念的组织恢复力上,而要把高纬地区的生态恢复力也包括到商业管理的目标之中.同时我们也认为区域生态系统的恢复力应该成为衡量企业可持续管理的一个有意义的指标,企业高层可以据此制定和修改企业的管理策略.最后,文章在结尾处呼吁对高纬地区内的跨国公司和国内公司的作用制定更为详细的研究议程.     

近期和长远时段内北极生态系统功能受到的影响

长期以来,就营养物质和碳循环而言,北极生态系统降低了初级生产力；能量,水和温室气体交换的水平已引起了局部和区域性的小幅度降温.大气CO2中的碳沉积在广袤而寒冷的有机土壤中,冰雪覆盖的低矮植被产生高的反射率,都影响了局部气候.然而,北极生态系统功能的许多方面都对气候变化及其产生的生物多样性影响敏感.当前的北极气候导致了低的有机物质分解速率,因此,尽管有机物和元素输入量较低,但北极生态系统还是趋向于积累有机物和元素,土壤中氮和磷等可利用元素结果成为促进碳固定以及生物量和有机物进一步积累的关键性限制因素.气候变暖可能增加特别是土壤中的碳和元素的周转,起初可能导致元素的丢失,但最后会慢慢的恢复.在北极生态系统中,单个物种和物种多样性已经明显地影响了元素的输入和滞留,另一方面,从长远来看,尽管CO2和紫外线增加对植物组织化学、分解和氮固定的影响可能变得重要,但对整个生态系统来说,影响可能很小.碳循环的示踪气体主要形式是CO2和CH4,大多数碳以CO2的形式损失,这些CO2是由植物和土壤生物产生.来自潮湿苔原生态系统以CH4形式释放的碳大约是CO2形式的5％,而且在没有任何其他变化的情况下,对变暖作出响应.冬天过程和植物类型也影响CH4释放和能量在生物圈和大气之间的交换,因为反射率从冬末到夏天存在很大的变化,在冬末,雪反射了入射的大部分光线,在夏天,生态系统吸收了入射的大部分光线,所以在所有的陆地生态系统中,北极生态系统在能量交换方面表现出巨大的季节性变化.植被深刻地影响北极生态系统水和能量交换.在冰雪覆盖期间,反射率从苔原、森林苔原、落叶林、常绿林依次降低.灌木和树增加了雪的深度,反过来又使冬天的土壤温度增加,因此,由气候变化而引起的未来植被方面的变化很可能深远地改变区域的气候.     

Our future in the Anthropocene biosphere

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed an interconnected and tightly coupled globalized world in rapid change. This article sets the scientific stage for understanding and responding to such change for global sustainability and resilient societies. We provide a systemic overview of the current situation where people and nature are dynamically intertwined and embedded in the biosphere, placing shocks and extreme events as part of this dynamic; humanity has become the major force in shaping the future of the Earth system as a whole; and the scale and pace of the human dimension have caused climate change, rapid loss of biodiversity, growing inequalities, and loss of resilience to deal with uncertainty and surprise. Taken together, human actions are challenging the biosphere foundation for a prosperous development of civilizations. The Anthropocene reality—of rising system-wide turbulence—calls for transformative change towards sustainable futures. Emerging technologies, social innovations, broader shifts in cultural repertoires, as well as a diverse portfolio of active stewardship of human actions in support of a resilient biosphere are highlighted as essential parts of such transformations.     

A comprehensive review of climate adaptation in the United States: more than before, but less than needed

We reviewed existing and planned adaptation activities of federal, tribal, state, and local governments and the private sector in the United States (U.S.) to understand what types of adaptation activities are underway across different sectors and scales throughout the country. Primary sources of review included material officially submitted for consideration in the upcoming 2013 U.S. National Climate Assessment and supplemental peer-reviewed and grey literature. Although substantial adaptation planning is occurring in various sectors, levels of government, and the private sector, few measures have been implemented and even fewer have been evaluated. Most adaptation actions to date appear to be incremental changes, not the transformational changes that may be needed in certain cases to adapt to significant changes in climate. While there appear to be no one-size-fits-all adaptations, there are similarities in approaches across scales and sectors, including mainstreaming climate considerations into existing policies and plans, and pursuing no- and low-regrets strategies. Despite the positive momentum in recent years, barriers to implementation still impede action in all sectors and across scales. The most significant barriers include lack of funding, policy and institutional constraints, and difficulty in anticipating climate change given the current state of information on change. However, the practice of adaptation can advance through learning by doing, stakeholder engagements (including “listening sessions”), and sharing of best practices. Efforts to advance adaptation across the U.S. and globally will necessitate the reduction or elimination of barriers, the enhancement of information and best practice sharing mechanisms, and the creation of comprehensive adaptation evaluation metrics.     

Uncertainties and recommendations

An assessment of the impacts of changes in climate and UV-B radiation on Arctic terrestrial ecosystems, made within the Arctic Climate Impacts Assessment (ACIA), highlighted the profound implications of projected warming in particular for future ecosystem services, biodiversity and feedbacks to climate. However, although our current understanding of ecological processes and changes driven by climate and UV-B is strong in some geographical areas and in some disciplines, it is weak in others. Even though recently the strength of our predictions has increased dramatically with increased research effort in the Arctic and the introduction of new technologies, our current understanding is still constrained by various uncertainties. The assessment is based on a range of approaches that each have uncertainties, and on data sets that are often far from complete. Uncertainties arise from methodologies and conceptual frameworks, from unpredictable surprises, from lack of validation of models, and from the use of particular scenarios, rather than predictions, of future greenhouse gas emissions and climates. Recommendations to reduce the uncertainties are wide-ranging and relate to all disciplines within the assessment. However, a repeated theme is the critical importance of achieving an adequate spatial and long-term coverage of experiments, observations and monitoring of environmental changes and their impacts throughout the sparsely populated and remote region that is the Arctic.     

Synthesis of effects in four Arctic subregions

An assessment of impacts on Arctic terrestrial ecosystems has emphasized geographical variability in responses of species and ecosystems to environmental change. This variability is usually associated with north-south gradients in climate, biodiversity, vegetation zones, and ecosystem structure and function. It is clear, however, that significant east-west variability in environment, ecosystem structure and function, environmental history, and recent climate variability is also important. Some areas have cooled while others have become warmer. Also, east-west differences between geographical barriers of oceans, archipelagos and mountains have contributed significantly in the past to the ability of species and vegetation zones to relocate in response to climate changes, and they have created the isolation necessary for genetic differentiation of populations and biodiversity hot-spots to occur. These barriers will also affect the ability of species to relocate during projected future warming. To include this east-west variability and also to strike a balance between overgeneralization and overspecialization, the ACIA identified four major sub regions based on large-scale differences in weather and climate-shaping factors. Drawing on information, mostly model output that can be related to the four ACIA subregions, it is evident that geographical barriers to species re-location, particularly the distribution of landmasses and separation by seas, will affect the northwards shift in vegetation zones. The geographical constraints--or facilitation--of northward movement of vegetation zones will affect the future storage and release of carbon, and the exchange of energy and water between biosphere and atmosphere. In addition, differences in the ability of vegetation zones to re-locate will affect the biodiversity associated with each zone while the number of species threatened by climate change varies greatly between subregions with a significant hot-spot in Beringia. Overall, the subregional synthesis demonstrates the difficulty of generalizing projections of responses of ecosystem structure and function, species loss, and biospheric feedbacks to the climate system for the whole Arctic region and implies a need for a far greater understanding of the spatial variability in the responses of terrestrial arctic ecosystems to climate change.     

气候变化与紫外线B辐射对北极苔原和极地荒漠生态系统的影响重要发现和扩展总结

引言 北极已成为对当前气候波动和预计的全球变暖增强的影响进行评估的重要地区.原因有以下几个方面:①在过去几十年中北极经历了大幅度的变暖过程(温度平均升高3℃,而在许多地区温度升高了4～5℃);②气候预测表明气候呈现持续变暖趋势,在2080年之前年平均气温升高4～5℃;③近期的气候变暖正在影响北极的环境和经济,这些影响还会加大,并对生活方式、文化及生态系统造成影响;④北极的变化可能会影响到地球上的其它地区.     

气候变化对景观和区域过程的影响及其对气候系统的反馈

北极生态系统的生物和物理过程会在不同的时间、空间尺度上对地球生态系统产生反馈作用,并与之相互影响.气候变化对北极地区的影响及其对全球气候系统的反馈主要存在着四种潜在机制反照率改变、生态系统对温室气体的排放或吸收、甲烷类温室气体的排放、影响海洋暖流淡水量的增长.这些反馈机制在某种程度上是由生态系统的分布和特征,尤其是大规模植被区域变化来控制的.通过少量全年的CO2通量测量表明,目前在地理分布上碳源区要比碳汇区要多.根据目前现有的关于CH4排放源地信息表明,景观规模上的CH4排放量对北极地区的温室效应平衡至关重要.北极地区的能量和水量平衡在变化的气候下,也是一个很重要的反馈机制.植被密度以及分布范围的增加会导致反射率的下降,因而会使地表吸收更多的能量.其效果可能会抵消由于极地沙漠地带向极地苔原带的的转化,或极地苔原带向极地森林带的转化,而造成的植被总净初级生产力碳沉降能力的提高而引起的负反馈.永久冻土带的退化对示踪气体动力学有着很复杂的影响.在不连续的永久冻土带地区,升温将会导致其完全消失.依赖于当地水文条件,温室气体排放可能由于气候环境变的干燥或湿润而使得其通量有所变化.总的来说,影响反馈的各种过程复杂的相互作用,以及这些过程随着时间地点的变化,加之数据的缺乏,又会在陆地生态系统气候变化对气候系统产生反馈作用的净效应估计上,产生许多的不确定性,这种不确定性将会影响到一些反馈的大小和方向.