Clear-sky ultraviolet radiation modelling using output from the Chemistry Climate Model Initiative

International audienceWe have derived values of the ultraviolet index (UVI) at solar noon using the Tropospheric Ultraviolet Model (TUV) driven by ozone, temperature and aerosol fields from climate simulations of the first phase of the Chemistry-Climate Model Initiative (CCMI-1). Since clouds remain one of the largest uncertainties in climate projections, we simulated only the clear-sky UVI. We compared the modelled UVI climatologies against present-day climatological values of UVI derived from both satellite data (the OMI-Aura OMUVBd product) and ground-based measurements (from the NDACC network). Depending on the region, relative differences between the UVI obtained from CCMI/TUV calculations and the ground-based measurements ranged between − 5.9 % and 10.6 %. We then calculated the UVI evolution throughout the 21st century for the four Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs 2.6, 4.5, 6.0 and 8.5). Compared to 1960s values, we found an average increase in the UVI in 2100 (of 2 %-4 %) in the tropical belt (30 • N-30 • S). For the mid-latitudes, we observed a 1.8 % to 3.4 % increase in the Southern Hemisphere for RCPs 2.6, 4.5 and 6.0 and found a 2.3 % decrease in RCP 8.5. Higher increases in UVI are projected in the Northern Hemisphere except for RCP 8.5. At high latitudes, ozone recovery is well identified and induces a complete return of mean UVI levels to 1960 values for RCP 8.5 in the Southern Hemisphere. In the Northern Hemisphere, UVI levels in 2100 are higher by 0.5 % to 5.5 % for RCPs 2.6, 4.5 and 6.0 and they are lower by 7.9 % for RCP 8.5. We analysed the impacts of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) on UVI from 1960 by comparing CCMI sensitivity simulations (1960-2100) with fixed GHGs or ODSs at their respective 1960 levels. As expected with ODS fixed at their 1960 levels, there is no large decrease in ozone levels and consequently no sudden increase in UVI levels. With fixed GHG, we observed a delayed return of ozone to 1960 values, with a corresponding pattern of change observed on UVI, and looking at the UVI difference between 2090s values and 1960s values, we found an 8 % increase in the tropical belt during the summer of each hemisphere. Finally we show that, while in the Southern Hemisphere the UVI is mainly driven by total ozone column, in the Northern Hemisphere both total ozone column and aerosol optical depth drive UVI levels, with aerosol optical depth having twice as much influence on the UVI as total ozone column does

Ultraviolet Radiation evolution during the 21st century

International audienceIn the context of a changing climate, the acceleration of the Brewer-Dobson circulation [Butchart 2014] leadsto a decrease of the ozone total column in the tropics. This decrease affects directly surface ultraviolet radiation,which are already very high in this area. Following the work of (Bais et al., 2011), (Butchart, 2014)and (Hegglin & Shepherd, 2009) on the future evolution of surface irradiance derived from Chemistry ClimateModels (CCM) projections, we projected here surface irradiance from 2010 to 2100 with focus on the tropics.We used the latest chemistry climate projection exercise ; Chemistry Climate Model Initiative (CCMI) coupledwith a radiative transfer model (TUV (Madronich, 1993)) to calculate the evolution of surface Ultravioletradiation throughout the 21st century. Ultraviolet Index (UVi) has been specifically considered (McKenzie,Matthews, & Johnston, 1991).At first, simulation from RefC2 Chemistry Climate Model Initiative have been coupled with a radiativetransfer model, in order to obtained modeled UV index (UVi-M). UVi-M is then compared against availablesatellite ultraviolet radiation observations (OMI OMUVbd product) between 2005 and 2016. Statistical differenceand variance have been analysed versus different parameters: geographical location, model or ensembleof model outputs used in the radiative transfer calculation

Seed exchange networks for agrobiodiversity conservation. A review

The circulation of seed among farmers is central to agrobiodiversity conservation and dynamics. Agrobiodiversity, the diversity of agricultural systems from genes to varieties and crop species, from farming methods to landscape composition, is part of humanity's cultural heritage. Whereas agrobiodiversity conservation has received much attention from researchers and policy makers over the last decades, the methods available to study the role of seed exchange networks in preserving crop biodiversity have only recently begun to be considered. In this overview, we present key concepts, methods, and challenges to better understand seed exchange networks so as to improve the chances that traditional crop varieties (landraces) will be preserved and used sustainably around the world. The available literature suggests that there is insufficient knowledge about the social, cultural, and methodological dimensions of environmental change, including how seed exchange networks will cope with changes in climates, socio-economic factors, and family structures that have supported seed exchange systems to date. Methods available to study the role of seed exchange networks in the preservation and adaptation of crop specific and genetic diversity range from meta-analysis to modelling, from participatory approaches to the development of bio-indicators, from genetic to biogeographical studies, from anthropological and ethnographic research to the use of network theory. We advocate a diversity of approaches, so as to foster the creation of robust and policy-relevant knowledge. Open challenges in the study of the role of seed exchange networks in biodiversity conservation include the development of methods to (i) enhance farmers' participation to decision-making in agro-ecosystems, (ii) integrate ex situ and in situ approaches, (iii) achieve interdisciplinary research collaboration between social and natural scientists, and (iv) use network analysis as a conceptual framework to bridge boundaries among researchers, farmers and policy makers, as well as other stakeholders