Assessing land-based mitigation implications for biodiversity

The Paris Agreement to keep global temperature increase to well-below 2 °C and to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5 °C requires to formulate ambitious climate-change mitigation scenarios to reduce CO2 emissions and to enhance carbon sequestration. These scenarios likely require significant land-use change. Failing to mitigate climate change will result in an unprecedented warming with significant biodiversity loss. The mitigation potential on land is high. However, how land-based mitigation options potentially affect biodiversity is poorly understood. Some land-based mitigation options could also counter the biodiversity loss. Here we reviewed the recently scientific literature to assess twenty land-based mitigation options that are implemented in different mitigation pathways to comply with the Paris Agreement for their biodiversity impacts by using the Mean Species Abundance (MSALU) indicator for land use. We showed the likely land-use transition and potential MSALU changes for each option, compared their carbon sequestration opportunities (tC per ha) and assessed the resulting biodiversity change in two case scenarios. Our results showed that most options benefit biodiversity. Reforestation of cultivated and managed areas together with restoration of wetlands deliver the largest MSALU increases, if land is allowed to reach a mature state over time. A quarter of the assessed options, including intensification of agricultural areas and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, decreased MSALU. Options, such as afforestation and reduced deforestation, either positively or negatively affected MSALU. This depends on their local implementation and adopted forest-conservation schemes. Comparing the different options showed that avoiding deforestation by implementing agroforestry at the expense of pastures delivered both the largest MSALU increases and the highest carbon sequestration opportunities. However, agroforestry that leads to deforestation, enhanced carbon sequestration slightly but with a marginal MSALU increase. This stresses the importance of avoiding forest conversion. Our study advances the understanding on current and future benefits and adverse effects of land-based mitigation options on biodiversity. This certainly helps biodiversity conservation and determines the regions with large land-based mitigation potential.</p

Comprehensive analysis of chemical and biological problems associated with browning agents used in aquatic studies

Inland waters receive and process large amounts of colored organic matter from the terrestrial surroundings. These inputs dramatically affect the chemical, physical, and biological properties of water bodies, as well as their roles as global carbon sinks and sources. However, manipulative studies, especially at ecosystem scale, require large amounts of dissolved organic matter with optical and chemical properties resembling indigenous organic matter. Here, we compared the impacts of two leonardite products (HuminFeed and SuperHume) and a freshly derived reverse osmosis concentrate of organic matter in a set of comprehensive mesocosm- and laboratory-scale experiments and analyses. The chemical properties of the reverse osmosis concentrate and the leonardite products were very different, with leonardite products being low and the reverse osmosis concentrate being high in carboxylic functional groups. Light had a strong impact on the properties of leonardite products, including loss of color and increased particle formation. HuminFeed presented a substantial impact on microbial communities under light conditions, where bacterial production was stimulated and community composition modified, while in dark potential inhibition of bacterial processes was detected. While none of the browning agents inhibited the growth of the tested phytoplankton Gonyostomum semen, HuminFeed had detrimental effects on zooplankton abundance and Daphnia reproduction. We conclude that the effects of browning agents extracted from leonardite, particularly HuminFeed, are in sharp contrast to those originating from terrestrially derived dissolved organic matter. Hence, they should be used with great caution in experimental studies on the consequences of terrestrial carbon for aquatic systems

Determining sectoral and regional sensitivity to climate and socio-economic change in Europe using impact response surfaces

Responses to future changes in climatic and socio-economic conditions can be expected to vary between sectors and regions, reflecting differential sensitivity to these highly uncertain factors. A sensitivity analysis was conducted using a suite of impact models (for health, agriculture, biodiversity, land use, floods and forestry) across Europe with respect to changes in key climate and socio-economic variables. Depending on the indicators, aggregated grid or indicative site results are reported for eight rectangular sub-regions that together span Europe from northern Finland to southern Spain and from western Ireland to the Baltic States and eastern Mediterranean, each plotted as scenario-neutral impact response surfaces (IRSs). These depict the modelled behaviour of an impact variable in response to changes in two key explanatory variables. To our knowledge, this is the first time the IRS approach has been applied to changes in socio-economic drivers and over such large regions. The British Isles region showed the smallest sensitivity to both temperature and precipitation, whereas Central Europe showed the strongest responses to temperature and Eastern Europe to precipitation. Across the regions, sensitivity to temperature was lowest for the two indicators of river discharge and highest for Norway spruce productivity. Sensitivity to precipitation was lowest for intensive agricultural land use, maize and potato yields and Scots pine productivity, and highest for Norway spruce productivity. Under future climate projections, North-eastern Europe showed increases in yields of all crops and productivity of all tree species, whereas Central and East Europe showed declines. River discharge indicators and forest productivity (except Holm oak) were projected to decline over southern European regions. Responses were more sensitive to socio-economic than to climate drivers for some impact indicators, as demonstrated for heat-related mortality, coastal flooding and land use

Exploring interaction effects from mechanisms between climate and land-use changes and the projected consequences on biodiversity

Changes in climate and land use are major drivers of biodiversity loss. These drivers likely interact and their mutual effects alter biodiversity. These interaction mechanisms are rarely considered in biodiversity assessments, as only the combined individual effects are reported. In this study, we explored interaction effects from mechanisms that potentially affect biodiversity under climate change. These mechanisms entail that climate-change effects on, for example, species abundance and species’ range shifts depend on land-use change. Similarly, land-use change impacts are contingent on climate change. We explored interaction effects from four mechanisms and projected their consequences on biodiversity. These interactions arise if species adapted to modified landscapes (e.g. cropland) differ in their sensitivity to climate change from species adapted to natural landscapes. We verified these interaction effects by performing a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of 42 bioclimatic studies (with different increases in global mean temperature) on species distributions in landscapes with varying cropland levels. We used the Fraction of Remaining Species as the effect-size metric in this meta-analysis. The influence of global mean temperature increase on FRS did not significantly change with different cropland levels. This finding excluded interaction effects between climate and landscapes that are modified by other land uses than cropping. Although we only assessed coarse climate and land-use patterns, global mean temperature increase was a good, significant model predictor for biodiversity decline. This emphasizes the need to analyse interactions between land-use and climate-change effects on biodiversity simultaneously in other modified landscapes. Such analyses should also integrate other conditions, such as spatial location, adaptive capacity and time lags. Understanding all these interaction mechanisms and other conditions will help to better project future biodiversity trends and to develop coping strategies for biodiversity conservation

Data for: Assessing land-based mitigation implications for biodiversity

Supplementary material containing additional data in the form of tables for the manuscript "Assessing land-based mitigation implications for biodiversity

Potential biodiversity change in Central Asian grasslands : scenarios for the impact of climate and land-use change

Central Asian grasslands are extensively used for pastoral livestock grazing. This traditional land use is nowadays characterized by intensifying grasslands into more productive pastures. This change affects biodiversity and diminishes grasslands’ ecological role. Biodiversity impacts are probably also exacerbated by climate change. These changes in biodiversity are poorly studied in Central Asia. Here, we estimated potential biodiversity changes in the Central Asian grasslands using the latest shared socio-economic pathways and the representative concentration pathways (i.e., SSP-RCP scenario framework). We selected scenarios with contrasting socio-economic and climate conditions (i.e., SSP1-RCP4.5, SSP3-RCP8.5, SSP4-RCP4.5, and SSP5-RCP8.5) and further detailed the land-use scenarios for the region using stakeholders’ input. We indicated future biodiversity by the mean species abundance indicator. The contrasting scenario combinations showed that grasslands’ biodiversity will decline under each scenario. The strongest impact on biodiversity is expected in SSP5-RCP8.5, where half of the grasslands are likely to lose most of their local originally occurring species by 2100. The lowest impact is expected in SSP4-RCP4.5. Our study stresses the potential vulnerability of this region to increasing land-use intensity and climate change. These impact projections can help regional decision makers to develop and implement better biodiversity-conservation and sustainable management policies for these grasslands

Response to commentary ‘towards more meaningful scenarios of biodiversity responses to land-use change in Central Asia

With this letter, we respond to the commentary by Kamp et al. on our paper (Nunez et al. in Reg Environ Chang 20:39, 2020) that reports on potential biodiversity change in Central Asian grasslands using climate and land-use change scenarios. In their commentary, Kamp et al. criticize data and methods employed and discuss several shortfalls of our approach. In this response, we argue that in our paper projections of future biodiversity already acknowledge the issues indicated by Kamp et al. We elaborate on the reasons why. We maintain our main finding that, based on a number of contrasting scenarios (shared socioeconomic pathways and representative concentration pathways combinations), biodiversity in grasslands in Central Asia will potentially decline under each scenario. We conclude that while our data and methods conservatively estimate potential biodiversity changes in the Central Asian grasslands, they could be enriched with more elements. The results, however, are likely to confirm the vulnerability of these grasslands and the possible decline in their biodiversity.</p

Assessing the impacts of climate change on biodiversity: is below 2 °C enough?

Large changes in biodiversity are expected to occur if climate change continues at its current pace. Adverse effects include changes in species habitats and compositions, and consequently changes in ecosystem functioning. We assessed the magnitude of expected changes of biodiversity by performing a meta-analysis of the responses of species distributions to climate change. We focused on the proportion of local remaining species and their habitats. We summarized 97 studies and calculated two effect-size metrics from their results to quantify changes in biodiversity. These metrics are the fraction of remaining species (FRS) and the fraction of remaining area (FRA) with suitable climate for each species. Both metrics calculate deviations from the original biodiversity state and together they indicate biodiversity intactness. We found an expected gradual decrease in both FRS and FRA with significant reductions of 14% and 35% between 1 and 2 °C increase in global mean temperatures. Strong impacts are projected for both mammals and plants with FRS reductions of 19%. The climate-change response of biodiversity varies strongly among taxonomic groups and biomes. For some taxonomic groups the FRA declines strongly beyond 3 °C of temperature increase. Although these estimates are conservative, as we assume that species are unable to disperse or adapt, we conclude that already at moderate levels (i.e., 1–2 °C) of temperature increase a significant decrease of original biodiversity is projected. Our research supports the pledge to limit climate change to 1.5 °C and preferably lower to protect biodiversity.</p