Adriana De Palma

Has land use pushed terrestrial biodiversity beyond the planetary boundary? A global assessment.

Crossing “safe” limits for biodiversity loss The planetary boundaries framework attempts to set limits for biodiversity loss within which ecological function is relatively unaffected. Newbold et al. present a quantitative global analysis of the extent to which the proposed planetary boundary has been crossed (see the Perspective by Oliver). Using over 2 million records for nearly 40,000 terrestrial species, they modeled the response of biodiversity to land use and related pressures and then estimated, at a spatial resolution of ∼1 km2, the extent and spatial patterns of changes in local biodiversity. Across 65% of the terrestrial surface, land use and related pressures have caused biotic intactness to decline beyond 10%, the proposed “safe” planetary boundary. Changes have been most pronounced in grassland biomes and biodiversity hotspots. Science, this issue p. 288; see also p. 220 Land use has reduced biosphere intactness below safe limits across 65% of Earth’s terrestrial surface, especially in grasslands. Land use and related pressures have reduced local terrestrial biodiversity, but it is unclear how the magnitude of change relates to the recently proposed planetary boundary (“safe limit”). We estimate that land use and related pressures have already reduced local biodiversity intactness—the average proportion of natural biodiversity remaining in local ecosystems—beyond its recently proposed planetary boundary across 58.1% of the world’s land surface, where 71.4% of the human population live. Biodiversity intactness within most biomes (especially grassland biomes), most biodiversity hotspots, and even some wilderness areas is inferred to be beyond the boundary. Such widespread transgression of safe limits suggests that biodiversity loss, if unchecked, will undermine efforts toward long-term sustainable development.

Predicting how populations decline to extinction

Global species extinction typically represents the endpoint in a long sequence of population declines and local extinctions. In comparative studies of extinction risk of contemporary mammalian species, there appear to be some universal traits that may predispose taxa to an elevated risk of extinction. In local population-level studies, there are limited insights into the process of population decline and extinction. Moreover, there is still little appreciation of how local processes scale up to global patterns. Advancing the understanding of factors which predispose populations to rapid declines will benefit proactive conservation and may allow us to target at-risk populations as well as at-risk species. Here, we take mammalian population trend data from the largest repository of population abundance trends, and combine it with the PanTHERIA database on mammal traits to answer the question: what factors can be used to predict decline in mammalian abundance? We find in general that environmental variables are better determinants of cross-species population-level decline than intrinsic biological traits. For effective conservation, we must not only describe which species are at risk and why, but also prescribe ways to counteract this.

Large reorganizations in butterfly communities during an extreme weather event

Drought events are projected to increase in frequency and magnitude, which may alter the composition of ecological communities. Using a functional community metric that describes abundance, life history traits and conservation status, based upon Grimes CSR (Competitive-Stress tolerant-Ruderal) scheme, we investigated how British butterfly communities changed during an extreme drought in 1995. Throughout Britain, the total abundance of these insects had a significant tendency to increase, accompanied by substantial changes in community composition, particularly in more northerly, wetter sites. Communities tended to shift away from specialist, vulnerable species, and towards generalist, widespread species and, in the year following, communities had yet to return to equilibrium. Importantly, heterogeneity in surrounding landscapes mediated community responses to the drought event. Contrary to expectation, however, community shifts were more extreme in areas of greater topographic diversity, whilst land-cover diversity buffered community changes and limited declines in vulnerable specialist butterflies.

Dimensions of biodiversity loss: Spatial mismatch in land-use impacts on species, functional and phylogenetic diversity of European bees

Abstract Aim Agricultural intensification and urbanization are important drivers of biodiversity change in Europe. Different aspects of bee community diversity vary in their sensitivity to these pressures, as well as independently influencing ecosystem service provision (pollination). To obtain a more comprehensive understanding of human impacts on bee diversity across Europe, we assess multiple, complementary indices of diversity. Location One Thousand four hundred and forty six sites across Europe. Methods We collated data on bee occurrence and abundance from the published literature and supplemented them with the PREDICTS database. Using Raos Quadratic Entropy, we assessed how species, functional and phylogenetic diversity of 1,446 bee communities respond to land‐use characteristics including land‐use class, cropland intensity, human population density and distance to roads. We combined these models with statistically downscaled estimates of land use in 2005 to estimate and map—at a scale of approximately 1 km2—the losses in diversity relative to semi‐natural/natural baseline (the predicted diversity of an uninhabited grid square, consisting only of semi‐natural/natural vegetation). Results We show that—relative to the predicted local diversity in uninhabited semi‐natural/natural habitat—half of all EU27 countries have lost over 10% of their average local species diversity and two‐thirds of countries have lost over 5% of their average local functional and phylogenetic diversity. All diversity measures were generally lower in pasture and higher‐intensity cropland than in semi‐natural/natural vegetation, but facets of diversity showed less consistent responses to human population density. These differences have led to marked spatial mismatches in losses: losses in phylogenetic diversity were in some areas almost 20 percentage points (pp.) more severe than losses in species diversity, but in other areas losses were almost 40 pp. less severe. Main conclusions These results highlight the importance of exploring multiple measures of diversity when prioritizing and evaluating conservation actions, as species‐diverse assemblages may be phylogenetically and functionally impoverished, potentially threatening pollination service provision.

Changes in the Biodiversity Intactness Index in tropical and subtropical forest biomes, 2001-2012.

Few biodiversity indicators are available that reflect the state of broad-sense biodiversity—rather than of particular taxa—at fine spatial and temporal resolution. The Biodiversity Intactness Index (BII) estimates how the average abundance of native terrestrial species in a region compares with their abundances before pronounced human impacts. BII is designed for use with data from a wide range of taxa and functional groups and for estimation at any resolution for which data on land use and related pressures are available. For each year from 2001 to 2012, we combined models of how land use and related pressures in tropical and subtropical forested biomes affect overall abundance and compositional similarity of plants, fungi, invertebrates and vertebrates, with data on anthropogenic pressures to produce annual maps of modelled BII at a spatial resolution of 30 arc seconds (roughly 1 km at the equator) across tropical and subtropical forested biomes. This is the first time temporal change in BII has been estimated across such a large region. The approach we have used to model compositional similarity uses data more efficiently than that used previously when estimating BII. Across tropical and subtropical biomes, BII fell by an average of 1.9 percentage points between 2001 and 2012, with 81 countries seeing an average reduction and 43 an average increase; the extent of primary forest fell by 3.9% over the same period. Changes are not strongly related to countries’ rates of economic growth over the same period.

Worldwide impacts of past and projected future land-use change on local species richness and the Biodiversity Intactness Index

Although people have modified the world around us throughout human history, the ‘Great Acceleration’ has seen drivers such as land conversion, exploitation of natural populations, species introductions, pollution and human-induced climate change placing biodiversity under increasing pressure. In this paper we examine 1) how terrestrial species communities have been impacted over the last thousand years of human development and 2) how plausible futures defined by alternative socio-economic scenarios are expected to impact species communities in the future. We use the PREDICTS (Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems) database to model impacts of land-use change and human population on local species richness, community abundance, and biodiversity intactness using a mixed-effects modelling structure. Historical impacts are inferred through projection of model results onto maps of historical land use, provided by the land-use harmonization project, and gridded human population density (HYDE 3.1). Future impacts are explored using the Shared Socio-economic Pathway (SSP) scenarios. These scenarios detail five plausible global futures based upon socio-economic factors such as wealth, population, education, technology, and reliance on fossil fuels, and can be combined with Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios to consider climate mitigation strategies. We project model results onto the gridded outputs of six SSP/RCP scenario combinations: SSP1/RCP2.6, SSP2/RCP4.5, SSP3/RCP7.0, SSP4/RCP3.4, SSP4/RCP6.0, and SSP5/RCP8.5. Historical trend lines show that most losses in local biodiversity are relatively recent, with 75% of all loss in both abundance-based Biodiversity Intactness Index and species richness occurring post-1800. Stark regional differences emerge in all future scenarios, with biodiversity in African regions undergoing greater losses than Oceania, North America and the European regions. Although climate change is expected to have severe detrimental impacts to biodiversity – which are not quantified in these results – it is important to consider how the climate change mitigation itself may also impact biodiversity. Our results suggest that strong climate change mitigation through biofuel production will detrimentally impact biodiversity: SSP4/RCP3.4 (with high biofuel mitigation) is predicted to see two times the decrease in abundance-based biodiversity intactness and three times the decrease in local species richness between 2015–2100 as is predicted for SSP4/RCP6.0 (with lower levels of mitigation). SSP4/RCP3.4 forecasts the greatest impact to average local species richness of all the SSP/RCP combinations with an average loss of 13% of local species richness projected to have occurred by 2100. SSP3/RCP7.0 – a scenario describing a globally segregated, and economically protectionist future with low climate change mitigation – has the worst impacts on abundance-based biodiversity intactness with an average loss of 26% of intactness by 2100. However, a brighter future is possible; SSP1/RCP2.6 describes a more sustainable future, where human populations are provided for without further jeopardising environmental integrity – in this scenario we project that biodiversity will recover somewhat, with gains in biodiversity intactness and species richness in many regions of the world by 2100.

Global map of the Biodiversity Intactness Index, from Newbold et al. (2016) Science

This is the data used to plot figure S4 in Newbold et al. (2016) \u201cHas land use pushed terrestrial biodiversity beyond the planetary boundary? A global assessment\u201d, Science 353:288-29, doi 10.1126/science.aaf2201. The variable plotted, Biodiversity Intactness Index, is the modeled average abundance of originally-present species, relative to their abundance in an intact ecosystem. Please refer to Newbold et al. (2016) for all details, and please cite it when using these data.