I have not looked at the original model or report, but the summary statements that were included in the initial posting are troublesome, to whit:
"...Their results showed that animals and plants that can adjust to climate change will have a competitive advantage over those that don't..." and "...Animals with small geographic ranges, specific habitat needs and difficulty dispersing are likely to go extinct under climate change, their model shows. Further, these animals are more likely to be overrun by other species that can tolerate a wider range of habitats...." The first statement seems to be saying that survivor species have an competitive advantage over extinct species. It's hard to say quite what that means.... The second statement seems pretty obvious, though I guess there's no harm in modeling it. Additionally, I find the supposedly clarifying metaphor of a train, all of whose cars travel at different speeds, rather unenlightening. Well, they are only claiming that their model is a first step, so perhaps these lapses can be forgiven. Martin M. Meiss 2012/1/6 David L. McNeely <mcnee...@cox.net> > ---- Christopher Heckscher <checksc...@desu.edu> wrote: > > This underscores the critical need for baseline inventory of multiple > taxonomic groups in all parts of the world - not just tropical or remote > regions. Even in relatively well studied regions of North America like the > northeast we generally have a poor understanding of rare species' > distributions. Without a basic baseline we cannot expect to accurately > predict how sensitive species will react to climate change nor will we be > able to assess the effects of climate change decades in the future. Yet > funding for species inventory projects to assist in amassing this baseline > data is next to impossible to obtain and is often shunned by armchair > ecologists with little or no field experience as not "real" science. In > fact, many grant programs specifically state they will >not support survey > or inventory work. > > This is in general a matter of priorities of the funding programs. We do > have the big picture on what organisms are where, for the most part and in > well studied regions. We have much less understanding of how they are > integrated to function at higher levels of organization. The agencies > often see surveys as redundant, even if they do fill in gaps or address > specialized locales . The best way to get the funding for inventory work > is to show that the inventory is essential to answering higher order > questions, and to make those questions the main focus of the proposal. At > least that is how I have seen it work, and what I have been told by funding > organizations. Another situation occurs when The Nature Conservancy (or > other NGO) is interested in a property, then they are interested in finding > out what its community is. But they sometimes are interested for a > particular reason, and will hope for "volunteer" inventories of other > groups of organisms. > > David McNeely > > > > > > > Christopher M. Heckscher, Ph.D. > > Assistant Professor, Environmental Science & Ecology > > Institutional Project Director, NOAA Environmental Cooperative Science > Center > > Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources > > Delaware State University > > 1200 N. DuPont Highway > > Dover, DE 19901 > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [ > ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Allen Sa;lzberg [ > asalzb...@herpdigest.org] > > Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 9:09 AM > > To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU > > Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Climate Change Models May Vasty Underestimate > Extinctions > > > > Climate Change Models May Vasty Underestimate Extinctions > > > > ScienceDaily (Jan. 3, 2012) — Predictions of the loss of animal and > plant diversity around the world > > are common under models of future climate change. But a new study shows > that because these > > climate models don't account for species competition and movement, they > could grossly > > underestimate future extinctions. > > See Also: > > > > "We have really sophisticated meteorological models for predicting > climate change," says ecologist > > Mark Urban, the study's lead author. "But in real life, animals move > around, they compete, they > > parasitize each other, and they eat each other. The majority of our > predictions don't include these > > important interactions." > > > > Plenty of experimental studies have shown that species are already > moving in response to climate > > change, says Urban, assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary > biology at the University of > > Connecticut. For example, as temperatures rise over time, animals and > plants that can't take the > > heat are moving to higher altitudes where temperatures are cooler. > > > > But not all species can disperse fast enough to get to these more > suitable places before they die > > off, Urban says. And if they do make it to these better habitats, they > may be out-competed by the > > species that are already there -- or the ones that got there first. > > > > With coauthors Josh Tewksbury and Kimberly Sheldon of the University of > Washington, Urban > > created a mathematical model that takes into account the varying rates > of migration and the > > different intensities of competition seen in ecological communities. The > goal was to predict just > > how successful species within these communities would be at shifting to > completely new habitats. > > > > Their results showed that animals and plants that can adjust to climate > change will have a > > competitive advantage over those that don't. > > > > Animals with small geographic ranges, specific habitat needs and > difficulty dispersing are likely to > > go extinct under climate change, their model shows. Further, these > animals are more likely to be > > overrun by other species that can tolerate a wider range of habitats. > > > > "When a species has a small range, it's more likely to be out-competed > by others," Urban says. "It's > > not about how fast you can move, but how fast you move relative to your > competitors." > > > > Urban likens this scenario to a train traveling up a mountain on a > track. If each boxcar -- > > representing a species -- travels at the same speed, they will likely > all reach the top eventually. But > > in reality, each car can move at a different speed, creating a collision > course. > > > > "There's always a car in front of you and a car behind," explains Urban. > "When you introduce the > > ability to move at different speeds, they're constantly bumping into one > another, even running > > each other over. It's a recipe for disaster." > > > > Importantly, the authors speculate that current predictions of > biodiversity loss under climate > > change -- many of which are used by conservation organizations and > governments -- could be > > vastly underestimating species extinctions. > > > > Tropical communities, for example, which often have many species living > in small areas, could be > > among the hardest hit by climate change. Urban says this is a first step > toward making climate > > change predictions of biodiversity more sophisticated. > > > > "This is a first step -- to include in our models things that we know > are true, like competition and > > dispersal," says Urban. "Knowing these things, can we predict which > species might be most at > > risk?" > > > > Urban's paper was published in the Jan. 4 online edition of the > Proceedings of the Royal Society B: > > Biological Sciences. The work was funded by the National Science > Foundation. > > -- > David McNeely >
