Changes to hydrologic regimes was the second-most cited climate i

Changes to hydrologic regimes was the second-most cited climate impact, identified 27 times (15%). The least cited climate impact was habitat fragmentation (only 5 citations, 3%). Among the 20 projects, approximately three-quarters of anticipated climate impacts are expected to manifest in ways that are exacerbations of traditional threats—e.g., habitat loss and degradation, altered fire or hydrologic regimes. Novel impacts included shifting ranges (e.g., increased semi-deciduous forest cover in the Atlantic Forest project due to enhanced dryness),

food web disruptions (e.g., delayed insect emergence in the VRT752271 solubility dmso Central Appalachians with consequences for wildlife), and changes in life history timing such as reproductive season (e.g., changes in learn more recruitment rates of giant clams in the Northern Reefs of Palau due to an increase in ocean click here acidification). In terms of underlying climate factors, temperature changes, including warmer ocean temperatures, were the dominant driver of 85 of the potential climate impacts (46%) (Table 4). Precipitation changes

and sea level rise were cited 61 (33%) and 24 (13%) times, respectively. The least cited climate factor was ocean acidification (4 citations, 2%). The predominance of temperature-mediated climate impacts is not especially surprising, but it does reinforce the importance of this fundamental environmental variable. Changing air and sea temperatures are the best documented climate changes and among the most pervasive. As scientific uncertainty about the until direction and magnitude of precipitation changes is reduced, we would expect the relative importance of this climate variable to increase. Likewise with sea-level rise and ocean acidification, both of which will likely continue and perhaps accelerate, but about which the conservation implications are only beginning to be understood. The similarities of expected climate impacts to ‘conventional’ threats raise the possibility that traditional conservation interventions might apply. For example, fire management practices and habitat restoration strategies

would remain relevant for restoring appropriate fire regimes and compensating for habitat loss, respectively. However, the magnitude and direction of climate impacts could be different than conventional threats and may require modification of specific actions. For example, climate change could increase hydrologic variability (i.e., more flood events) whereas dams generally reduce such variability. Both affect biodiversity by altering hydrologic regimes, but each would prompt different strategies to compensate for anticipated increases or decreases in variability. The nature of climate impacts could also prompt conventional conservation strategies to be deployed for different purposes. Corridors have commonly been used as a strategy to reconnect isolated habitat patches and to restore gene flow.

Comments are closed.