Climate drives the geography of marine consumption by changing predator communities

Este artículo contiene 7 páginas, 3 figuras, 1 tabla.The global distribution of primary production and consumption by humans (fisheries) is well-documented, but we have no map linking the central ecological process of consumption within food webs to temperature and other ecological drivers. Using standardized assays that span 105° of latitude on four continents, we show that rates of bait consumption by generalist predators in shallow marine ecosystems are tightly linked to both temperature and the composition of consumer assemblages. Unexpectedly, rates of consumption peaked at midlatitudes (25 to 35°) in both Northern and Southern Hemispheres across both seagrass and unvegetated sediment habitats. This pattern contrasts with terrestrial systems, where biotic interactions reportedly weaken away from the equator, but it parallels an emerging pattern of a subtropical peak in marine biodiversity. The higher consumption at midlatitudes was closely related to the type of consumers present, which explained rates of consumption better than consumer density, biomass, species diversity, or habitat. Indeed, the apparent effect of temperature on consumption was mostly driven by temperature-associated turnover in consumer community composition. Our findings reinforce the key influence of climate warming on altered species composition and highlight its implications for the functioning of Earth’s ecosystems.We acknowledge funding from the Smithsonian Institution and the Tula Foundation.Peer reviewe

Human actions alter tidal marsh seascapes and the provision of ecosystem services

Tidal marshes are a key component of coastal seascape mosaics that support a suite of socially and economically valuable ecosystem services, including recreational opportunities (e.g., fishing, birdwatching), habitat for fisheries species, improved water quality, and shoreline protection. The capacity for tidal marshes to support these services is, however, threatened by increasingly widespread human impacts that reduce the extent and condition of tidal marshes across multiple spatial scales and that vary substantially through time. Climate change causes species redistribution at continental scales, changes in weather patterns (e.g., rainfall), and a worsening of the effect of coastal squeeze through sea level rise. Simultaneously, the effects of urbanization such as habitat loss, eutrophication, fishing, and the spread of invasive species interact with each other, and with climate change, to fundamentally change the structure and functioning of tidal marshes and their food webs. These changes affect tidal marshes at local scales through changes in plant community composition, complexity, and condition and at regional scales through changes in habitat extent, configuration, and connectivity. However, research into the full effects of these multi-scaled, interactive stressors on ecosystem service provision in tidal marshes is in its infancy and is somewhat geographically restricted. This hinders our capacity to quickly and effectively curb loss and degradation of both tidal marshes and the services they deliver with targeted management actions. We highlight ten priority research questions seeking to quantify the consequences and scales of human impacts on tidal marshes that should be answered to improve management and restoration plans

Community Visioning for Marysville, Kansas: A three-part study comprised of a housing conditions inventory, city-wide brownfield redevelopment concepts, and ideas for transforming the Union Pacific Depot site into a regional destination

The Marysville Chamber of Commerce and Visitor’s Center and the City of Marysville collaborated with Kansas State University’s Department of Landscape Architecture and Regional & Community Planning (LARCP) and K-State’s Technical Assistance to Brownfields (TAB) for the spring and fall semesters in 2019. The intent of the collaboration was threefold: to document housing assets in the community, generate a set of strategic urban design ideas, and develop site planning alternatives for the Union Pacific Depot brownfield site. The effort was co-led by Associate Professor Blake Belanger and Assistant Professor Susmita Rishi. Professor Rishi and her students conducted a housing conditions inventory as part of PLAN650 Housing and Development Programs in the spring semester of 2019. She directed a different group of students to develop a set of urban design strategies in the fall semester of 2019 in PLAN640 Urban Design and Development Seminar. Also, during fall 2019, Professor Belanger led a group of students in LAR442 Site Research and Design Studio to develop design alternatives for the historic Union Pacific Train Depot site and adjacent parcels. Students shared their findings of PLAN640 and LAR442 in a public exhibit and open house on November 6, 2019. The agreement was mutually beneficial. Marysville leaders and decision-makers received fresh ideas, and students had the opportunity to work with external collaborators on a community engagement project. The City of Marysville funded the housing inventory during Phase 1 of the project and K-State TAB funded Phase 2 through an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Small Community Technical Assistance Grant (SCTAG) from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE). In addition to the student work, Sustainable Strategies DC prepared a Resource Roadmap and TAB provided a summary of the November 6, 2019 public open house. In total, the contributors included 2 professors, 57 students, and 2 professionals

Climate drives the geography of marine consumption by changing predator communities

The global distribution of primary production and consumption by humans (fisheries) is well-documented, but we have no map linking the central ecological process of consumption within food webs to temperature and other ecological drivers. Using standardized assays that span 105° of latitude on four continents, we show that rates of bait consumption by generalist predators in shallow marine ecosystems are tightly linked to both temperature and the composition of consumer assemblages. Unexpectedly, rates of consumption peaked at midlatitudes (25 to 35°) in both Northern and Southern Hemispheres across both seagrass and unvegetated sediment habitats. This pattern contrasts with terrestrial systems, where biotic interactions reportedly weaken away from the equator, but it parallels an emerging pattern of a subtropical peak in marine biodiversity. The higher consumption at midlatitudes was closely related to the type of consumers present, which explained rates of consumption better than consumer density, biomass, species diversity, or habitat. Indeed, the apparent effect of temperature on consumption was mostly driven by temperature-associated turnover in consumer community composition. Our findings reinforce the key influence of climate warming on altered species composition and highlight its implications for the functioning of Earth's ecosystems

Global COVID-19 lockdown highlights humans as both threats and custodians of the environment

The global lockdown to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic health risks has altered human interactions with nature. Here, we report immediate impacts of changes in human activities on wildlife and environmental threats during the early lockdown months of 2020, based on 877 qualitative reports and 332 quantitative assessments from 89 different studies. Hundreds of reports of unusual species observations from around the world suggest that animals quickly responded to the reductions in human presence. However, negative effects of lockdown on conservation also emerged, as confinement resulted in some park officials being unable to perform conservation, restoration and enforcement tasks, resulting in local increases in illegal activities such as hunting. Overall, there is a complex mixture of positive and negative effects of the pandemic lockdown on nature, all of which have the potential to lead to cascading responses which in turn impact wildlife and nature conservation. While the net effect of the lockdown will need to be assessed over years as data becomes available and persistent effects emerge, immediate responses were detected across the world. Thus initial qualitative and quantitative data arising from this serendipitous global quasi-experimental perturbation highlights the dual role that humans play in threatening and protecting species and ecosystems. Pathways to favorably tilt this delicate balance include reducing impacts and increasing conservation effectiveness

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health