Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
12/3/2015
http://www.paulchefurka.ca/Population.html
1300 - 1850.
12/3/2015
0.00
1980s
0.18
1990s
0.31
2000s
0.51
3.2 1.5
2015 Pearson Education, Inc.
.6
.6
1 1.5 2
1.5
.6
.3 . 1 .1
.3
.6
1 1.5 2.2
Figure 27.2a
Figure 27.2b
45
14
Arctic summer sea ice
extent (million km2)
.3
40
35
1920
1940
1960
1980
2000
12
10
8
6
4
1900
Year
(a) Northern Hemisphere
2015 Pearson Education, Inc.
.1 .1
30
1900
.3
1920
1940
1960
Year
1980
2000
12/3/2015
20
10
0
10
20
1900
1920
1940
1960
Year
1980
2000
Figure 27.2d
Global average
sea level change (mm)
200
150
100
50
0
50
1900
1920
1940
1960
Year
1980
2000
12/3/2015
60
Latitude
45
30
15
0
15
30
45
60
180
120
60
0
Longitude
60
120
180
Ectotherms
Ectotherm metabolic activity increases
exponentially with temperature, rather then
linearly
If a species is at the upper thermal tolerance limit, then
the species might be in trouble
Dillion from Univ. of Wyoming showed that ectotherms
were more vulnerable to temperature rises in tropical
regions
Metabolic rates increased more quickly in the
tropics than in the temperate or artic regions!
WHY?
12/3/2015
0.00
1980s
Arctic
North temperate
Tropical
South temperate
0.18
50
0.31
2000s
0.51
1990s
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
40
30
20
10
0
10
0.5
1980
1990
2000
2010
1980
1990
Year
(a) Change in mean temperature over
5 years in different regions of globe
3.2 1.5
.6
.3
.1 .1
.3
.6
1 1.5 2
1.5
.6
.3 . 1 .1
.3
.6
2000
2010
Year
(b) Change in metabolic rates in
different regions
1 1.5 2.2
Thermal Tolerance
Several species of
porcelain crabs live in the
intertidal of the eastern
Pacific
The upper thermal
tolerance limits LT 50
temperature at which 50%
mortality occurs
Thermal Tolerance
Thermal Tolerance
42
40
38
California
Chile
N. Gulf of California
Panama
36
LT50 (C)
34
32
30
28
2610
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
12/3/2015
Relative performance
1
Lower critical
temperature
(Tmin)
Upper critical
temperature
(Tmax )
Optimal
temperature
(Topt)
.5
Tolerance range
0
Body temperature
Temperature
1200
Precipitation
1000
800
600
400
18
20 22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38 40
Figure 27.6
2.0
Tree Growth
1
1.0
0.5
0.0
1960
1980
2000
2.0
Mortality rate (%/yr)
Pacific Northwest
California
Interior
1.5
Fir
Pine
Hemlock
Other
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
1960
1980
2000
Year
Red Indicate Increase Mortality Blue indication decrease
3.5
Western region
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
1960
1970
1980
1990
Year
2000
2010
4.0
4.0
Eastern region
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
1960
1970
1980
1990
Year
2000
2010
Alberta Saskatchewan
Manitoba
British
Columbia
Figure 27.7
Arctic
Quebec
Ontario
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
Trembling aspen
Jack pine
Black spruce
White spruce
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Year
12/3/2015
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/shrub-spread.html
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20120010311.pdf
12/3/2015
Migratory birds
40
20
10
1960
1970
1980
1990
Year
2000
150
340
140
330
130
320
120
310
110
300
100
290
90
280
80
270
70
260
60
1971
1976
1981
1986
Year
1991
1996
250
2001
Figure 27.9
10
5
0
5
10
15
20
25
Individual species
30
35
Amphibian
Bird
Butterfly
Fish
Fly
Mammal
12/3/2015
Figure 27.15
Range Shifts
200
150
100
50
0
50
100
10
12/3/2015
Dates of 5% emergence
or births
160
Caribou
150
140
Forage species
130
120
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Year
2015 Pearson Education, Inc.
0.6
0.4
0.2
Calf production
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.5
Index of trophic mismatch
1.0
11
12/3/2015
18
June
16
14
May
12
10
April
8
6 March
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
Day of year
Day of year
180
140
140
120
120
100
100
1960
80
1960
160
1970
1980
1990
2000
1970
1980
1990
2000
12
12/3/2015
22
600
21
450
20
300
19
150
18
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
0
2010
Figure 27.19a
Year
(a)
13
12/3/2015
Figure 27.19b
Pinus strobiformis
Pseudotsuga menzesii var. glauca
Quercus arizonica
Quercus emoryi
Quercus gambelii
Quercus hypoleucoides
TREES
Robina neomexicana
Arctostaphylos pungens
Ceanothus fendleri
Garrya wrightii
WOODY
SHRUBS
Mimosa aculeaticarpa
Arceuthobium vaginatum
Brickellia californica
Lotus greenei
SMALL
SHRUBS
AND HERBS
Pteridium aquilinum
Packera neomexicana
Thalictrum fendleri
Agave schottii
Dasylirion wheeleri
Nolina microcarpa
SUCCULENTS
Yucca madrensis
GRASSES
Urochloa arizonica
Elevation (feet) 2500 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
White bars are 1963 elevational range data black bars represent 2011 elevation
data from the current study.
14
12/3/2015
CC impact on NPP
Figure 27.22a
CC impact on NPP
A more recent analysis used the same methods
but extended the analysis to cover 2002-2009
The decade between 2000 and 2009 is the
warmest recorded since instrumental
measurements started
Results suggest a reduction in NPP of 0.55
petagrams of carbon as a result of regional drying
that would constrain plant growth
1.5
0
Change in mean NPP (19821999) (percentage per year)
1.5
(a)
Figure 27.23a
CC impact on NPP
Spatial patterns of NPP over the past decade have
not been globally consistent
NPP has increased over large areas in the Northern
Hemisphere
65% of vegetated land area had an increase
14
0
7
7
NPP trend (20002009) (gC/m2/yr)
14
21
15
12/3/2015
Temperature
Precipitation
(mm day 1)
( C)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
2080-2099
Precipitation
Temperature
0.8
(mm day 1)
( C)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5
more storms
greater snowfall
increased variability in rainfall
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1980-1999
16
12/3/2015
Questions
What are the sources of uncertainty in predicting the
response of ecological systems to future climate
change?
Figure 27.25
3
4
North
Pole
11
5
8
9
6
7
(a)
2
1
10
(b)
17
12/3/2015
Minnesota
Peatlands
Flakaliden
Toolik
Lake
CLIMEX
TERA
Shortgrass
Steppe
Buxton
Niwot
Ridge
Rocky
Mountain
Oak Ridge
Huntington
Forest
Rio Mayo
Harvard
Forest
Wytham
Woods
The Future
Most research focuses on developing mathematical
models that can provide information on future
climate change impacts
The bioclimatic envelope model is one of the most
widely applied modeling approaches to investigate
the response of species
Qualitative relationship between climate and species
geographic distribution
18
12/3/2015
Figure 27.27
The Future
Current Climate
Conditions
18 C
19 C
Projected Future
Climate
Conditions
19 C
20 C
22 C
20
23 C
Longitude
Latitude
21 C
21 C
Abundance
Latitude
20 C
22
21
Temperature ( C)
22 C
23 C
23
24 C
Longitude
RF-Current
FIA-Current
FIA-Current
GCM3 Avg Lo
GCM3 Avg Hi
GCM3 Avg Hi
46
13
710 1120 2130 3150 >50
<1
Sugar maple (Acer saccharum)
RF-Current
GCM3 Avg Lo
>50
By combining
individual species
into groups based
on forest types,
potential changes
in the geographic
distribution of
forest communities
could be examined
Temperature
FIA - Current
Species richness
RF - Current
GCM3Avg Lo
White/Red/Jack
Spruce/Fir
Lnglg/Slsh
Lobolly/Shrtif
Precipitation
GCM3Avg Hi
Oak/Pine
Oak/Hickory
Oak/Gum/Cypr
Elm/Ash/Ctnw
3 to 2
2 to 1
1 to 0
01
12
22
Maple/Beech/Birch
Aspen/Birch
NoDat/NoFor
Degrees C
< 60
60 to 30
30 to 20
20 to 0
010
1020
2030
3060
119 to 85
84 to 61
60 to 39
38 to 21
20 to 6
5 to 10
1126
2745
4684
% of current values
Tree richness
19
12/3/2015
20
12/3/2015
4
C-SOURCE
PgC/yr
2
C-SINK
4
1900
1940
1980
2020
2060
2100
Can we do anything
about climate change
and should we?
http://inside.mines.edu/~cshorey/pages/syg
n.html
2015 Pearson Education, Inc.
21