Antagonistic effect of natural habitat conversion on community adjustment to climate warming in nonbreeding waterbirds

Although the impacts of climate and land-use changes on biodiversity have been widely documented, their joint effects remain poorly understood. We evaluated how nonbreeding waterbird communities adjust to climate warming along a gradient of land-use change. Using midwinter waterbird counts (132 species) at 164 major nonbreeding sites in 22 Mediterranean countries, we assessed the changes in species composition from 1991 to 2010, relative to thermal niche position and breadth, in response to regional and local winter temperature anomalies and conversion of natural habitats. We observed a low-level, nonsignificant community adjustment to the temperature increase where natural habitat conversion occurred. At the sites affected by natural habitat conversion, the relative increase of warm-dwelling species in response to climate warming was 6 times lower and the relative species decline was 3 times higher than in the sites without natural habitat conversion. We found no evidence of community adjustment to climate warming when natural habitat conversion was >5% over 15 years. This strong negative effect suggests an antagonistic interaction between climate warming and habitat change. These results underline the importance of habitat conservation in community adjustment to climate warming.     

Temperature niche composition change inside and outside protected areas under climate warming

Conservation of biodiversity relies heavily on protected areas but their role and effectiveness under a warming climate is still debated. We estimated the climate-driven changes in the temperature niche compositions of bird communities inside and outside protected areas in southern Canada. We hypothesized that communities inside protected areas include a higher proportion of cold-dwelling species than communities outside protected areas. We also hypothesized that communities shift to warm-dwelling species more slowly inside protected areas than outside. To study community changes, we used large-scale and long-term (1997–2019) data from the Breeding Bird Survey of Canada. To describe the temperature niche compositions of bird communities, we calculated the community temperature index (CTI) annually for each community inside and outside protected areas. Generally, warm-dwelling species dominated communities with high CTI values. We modeled temporal changes in CTI as a function of protection status with linear mixed-effect models. We also determined which species contributed most to the temporal changes in CTI with a jackknife approach. As anticipated, CTI was lower inside protected areas than outside. However, contrary to our expectation, CTI increased faster over time inside than outside protected areas and warm-dwelling species contributed most to CTI change inside protected areas. These results highlight the ubiquitous impacts of climate warming. Currently, protected areas can aid cold-dwelling species by providing habitat, but as the climate warms, the communities’ temperature compositions inside protected areas quickly begin to resemble those outside protected areas, suggesting that protected areas delay the impacts of climate warming on cold-dwelling species.     

A climate-change vulnerability and adaptation assessment for Brazil's protected areas

Brazil hosts the largest expanse of tropical ecosystems within protected areas (PAs), which shelter biodiversity and support traditional human populations. We assessed the vulnerability to climate change of 993 terrestrial and coastal-marine Brazilian PAs by combining indicators of climatic-change hazard with indicators of PA resilience (size, native vegetation cover, and probability of climate-driven vegetation transition). This combination of indicators allows the identification of broad climate-change adaptation pathways. Seventeen PAs (20,611 km²) were highly vulnerable and located mainly in the Atlantic Forest (7 PAs), Cerrado (6), and the Amazon (4). Two hundred fifty-eight PAs (756,569 km²), located primarily in Amazonia, had a medium vulnerability. In the Amazon and western Cerrado, the projected severe climatic change and probability of climate-driven vegetation transition drove vulnerability up, despite the generally good conservation status of PAs. Over 80% of PAs of high or moderate vulnerability are managed by indigenous populations. Hence, besides the potential risks to biodiversity, the traditional knowledge and livelihoods of the people inhabiting these PAs may be threatened. In at least 870 PAs, primarily in the Atlantic Forest and Amazon, adaptation could happen with little or no intervention due to low climate-change hazard, high resilience status, or both. At least 20 PAs in the Atlantic Forest, Cerrado, and Amazonia should be targeted for stronger interventions (e.g., improvement of ecological connectivity), given their low resilience status. Despite being a first attempt to link vulnerability and adaptation in Brazilian PAs, we suggest that some of the PAs identified as highly or moderately vulnerable should be prioritized for testing potential adaptation strategies in the near future.     

A spatially explicit empirical model of structural development processes in natural forests based on climate and topography

Stand structure develops with stand age. Old-growth forests with well-developed stand structure support many species. However, development rates of stand structure likely vary with climate and topography. We modeled structural development of 4 key stand variables and a composite old-growth index as functions of climatic and topographic covariates. We used a hierarchical Bayesian method for analysis of extensive snap-shot National Forest Inventory (NFI) data in Japan (n = 9244) to account for differences in stand age. Development rates of structural variables and the old-growth index exhibited curvilinear responses to environmental covariates. Flat sites were characterized by high rates of structural development. Approximately 150 years were generally required to attain high values (approximately 0.8) of the old-growth index. However, the predicted age to achieve specific values varied depending on environmental conditions. Spatial predictions highlighted regional variation in potential structural development rates. For example, sometimes there were differences of >100 years among sites, even in the same catchment, in attainment of a medium index value (0.5) after timber harvesting. The NFI data suggested that natural forests, especially old natural forests (>150 years), remain generally on unproductive ridges, steep slopes, or areas with low temperature and deep snow, where many structural variables show slow development rates. We suggest that maintenance and restoration of old natural forests on flat sites should be prioritized for conservation due to the likely rapid development of stand structure, although remaining natural forests on low-productivity sites are still important and should be protected.     

Metrics for quantifying how much different threats contribute to red lists of species and ecosystems

Red lists are a crucial tool for the management of threatened species and ecosystems. Among the information red lists provide, the threats affecting the listed species or ecosystem, such as pollution or hunting, are of special relevance. This information can be used to quantify the relative contribution of different threat factors to biodiversity loss by disaggregating the cumulative extinction risk across species into components that can be attributed to certain threats. We devised and compared 3 metrics that accomplish this and may be used as indicators. The first metric calculates the portion of the temporal change in red list index (RLI) values that is caused by each threat. The second metric attributes the deviation of an RLI value from its reference value to different threats. The third metric uses extinction probabilities that are inferred from red list categories to estimate the contribution of a threat to the expected loss of species or ecosystems within 50 years. We used data from Norwegian Red Lists to test and evaluate these metrics. The first metric captured only a minor portion of the biodiversity loss caused by threats because it ignores species whose red list category does not change. Management authorities will often be interested in the contribution of a given threat to the total deviation from the optimal state. This was measured by the remaining metrics. The second metric was best suited for comparisons across countries or taxonomic groups. The third metric conveyed the same information but uses numbers of species or ecosystem as its unit, which is likely more intuitive to lay people and may be preferred when communicating with stakeholders or the general public.