Fissidens edamensis

Concern for the status of the Amazon rainforest usually centers on understanding the extent of <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/the-covid-19-pandemic-did-not-reduce-deforestation/">deforestation</a> and its devastating consequences. But this may only be part of the story. The authors of a new review article, published in the journal <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.abp8622">Science</a>, say that about 2.5 million square kilometers of the Amazon (that is almost 40 percent of remaining rainforest), is degraded by the impacts of human activities.&nbsp;



The review used data from previously published scientific studies and satellite imagery to identify the changes in the Amazon region between 2001 and 2018. Thirty-five researchers were involved, from institutions&nbsp;such as Brazil’s University of Campinas (Unicamp), the Amazon Environmental Research&nbsp;Institute (IPAM), National Institute for Space Research (INPE), and UK’s Lancaster&nbsp;University. The work is the result of the AIMES (Analysis, Integration and Modelling of the Earth&nbsp;System) project, linked to the <a href="https://futureearth.org/">Future Earth</a> international initiative, which brings together&nbsp;scientists and researchers who study sustainability.



The authors define the concept of degradation as transient or&nbsp;long-term changes in forest conditions, caused by humans. Degradation is different from&nbsp;deforestation, where the forest is removed altogether and a new land use, such as agriculture,&nbsp;is established in its place. Although highly degraded forests can lose almost all of the trees and animal species,&nbsp;the land use itself does not change.



In addition, the activities that lead to the degradation of forests can also generate carbon emissions; these are equivalent to or even greater than the emissions arising from deforestation itself. The authors identify four key disturbances driving forest degradation: forest fires, edge effects (changes that occur in forests adjacent to deforested areas), selective logging (such as illegal logging) and extreme drought. They also consider the effects of other, less well-studied factors such as habitat fragmentation. Different forest areas can be affected by one or more of these disturbances.



“Despite uncertainty about the total effect of these disturbances, it is clear that their cumulative effect can be as important as deforestation, for carbon emissions and biodiversity loss,” said study co-author Jos Barlow, a professor of conservation science at Lancaster University.



The Amazon rainforest is a vital, yet vulnerable, major ecosystem on Earth. It provides crucial global ecosystem services that help maintain the planet’s carbon and water cycles, and is home to a staggering one-third of all known species. Modern agricultural and industrial practices, along with changes brought about by global warming, are degrading Amazonian environments at a very rapid pace.&nbsp;



The scientists assess that the degradation of the Amazon also has significant socioeconomic impacts, which should be further investigated in the future.



“Degradation benefits the few, but places important burdens on many,” said Dr. Rachel Carmenta, a co-author based at the University of East Anglia. “Few people profit from the degradation processes, yet many lose out across all dimensions of human well-being – including health, nutrition and the place attachments held for the forest landscapes where they live. Furthermore, many of these burdens are hidden at present; recognizing them will help enable better governance with social justice at the center.”



According to the researchers, these degradation factors will continue to produce carbon emissions that will affect the atmosphere, irrespective of whether deforestation is halted in the Amazon.&nbsp;



“Even in an optimistic scenario, when there is no more deforestation, the effects of climate change will see degradation of the forest continue, leading to further carbon emissions,” said Dr. David Lapola, leader of the study and researcher at the Centre for Meteorological and Climatic Research Applied to Agriculture at Unicamp. However, “… preventing the advance of deforestation remains vital, and could also allow more attention to be directed to other drivers of forest degradation.”



The authors propose creating a monitoring system for forest degradation, as well as prevention and curbing of illegal logging and controlling the use of fire. One suggestion is the concept of “smart forests” which, like the idea of “smart cities,” would use different types of technologies and sensors to collect useful data in order to improve the quality of the environment.



Dr. Lapola and colleagues emphasize that policies to halt deforestation will not necessarily address the factors that cause degradation to remaining forest. These policies must therefore be complemented by other approaches to curb the disturbances that degrade the remaining forest ecosystems.&nbsp;



“Public and private actions and policies to curb deforestation will not necessarily address degradation as well,” said Dr. Lapola. “It is necessary to invest in innovative strategies.”



---



By <a href="mailto:bosman@truewan.co.za">Alison Bosman</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Staff Writer



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Humans are destroying what's left of the Amazon

Concern for the status of the Amazon rainforest usually centers...

Protected natural areas in the UK are struggling to halt declines in insects and <a href="https://www.earth.com/video/spiders-are-using-their-webs-to-extend-their-hearing/">spiders</a>. Protected habitats including nature reserves, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and Special Areas of Conservation have long been a key tool in conservation efforts.



A <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320722004372">new study</a> collating records for 1,230 invertebrate species between 1990 and 2018 suggests that protected areas can still experience biodiversity decline.



Researchers from the <a href="https://www.ceh.ac.uk/">UK Centre for Ecology &amp; Hydrology</a> (UKCEH) found that while protected areas were richer in species than unprotected areas, both have suffered similar rates of decline in native insects and spiders over the past 30 years. In particular, the study found severe declines among pollinators, such as bees and hoverflies.



“We see parallel trends for invertebrates in both protected and unprotected areas,” said Dr. Rob Cooke, lead author of the study. “It is worrying, as you would expect species to show more positive trends in protected areas.”



The researchers used data from invertebrate recording schemes that contained observations of ants, bees, hoverflies, ladybirds, spiders and wasps. The team examined changes in biodiversity throughout the study period.



The results showed that there were almost double the number of rare species in protected areas compared to unprotected parts of the UK. These trends remained stable in both protected and unprotected areas, suggesting that rare species benefit from conservation efforts. However, strong declines were found for common species, especially in protected areas.



The study showed that between 1990-2018:



<ul><li>Occupancy of all invertebrates in protected areas declined by 12.8% while in unprotected areas it declined by 11.5%.</li><li>Pollinators declined by 17.5% in protected areas and 20.3% in unprotected areas</li><li>Common species declined by 12.8% in protected areas and 6% in unprotected areas</li></ul>



“Protected areas are often designated specifically to help rare species. But the more common species appear to be falling through the cracks. It should serve as a warning as today’s common species can be tomorrow’s rare species," said Dr. Cooke.



The experts suggest more can be done, such as evidence-based policies, targets and management focused more on the effectiveness, rather than just the coverage of protected areas. The research team is optimistic that this signals an opportunity to strengthen protected areas and better conserve biodiversity.



---



By <a href="mailto:katherinebucko@gmail.com">Katherine Bucko</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Staff Writer



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Protected areas are failing to safeguard biodiversity

Protected natural areas in the UK are struggling to halt...

Recent studies have shown that the loss of species from plant communities can reduce ecosystem functions such as productivity, soil health, and carbon storage. This reduced functioning can destabilize ecosystems in the long term, disrupting their ability to provide essential services to our planet. However, according to a new study led by the <a href="https://www.uzh.ch/en.html">University of Zurich</a>, assessing such processes is only possible if experiments can be conducted for a sufficient length of time.



The scientists investigated the stability of plant biomass production over two decades in one of the longest grassland <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/biodiversity-loss-weakens-ecosystem-functioning/">biodiversity</a> experiments in the world, the <a href="http://the-jena-experiment.de/">Jena Experiment</a> in Germany. The analysis revealed that, after more than a decade, plant species in more diverse communities complemented each other in producing stable biomass.&nbsp;



By contrast, if plant diversity was low, community biomass varied more dramatically from year to year. Moreover, due to large fluctuations in species populations, species-rich communities had not yet stabilized during the first decade of the experiment.



“We now realize that the mechanisms by which diverse species communities maintain ecosystem functioning in the long term are continually developing even after two decades,” said study lead author Cameron Wagg, an expert in agroecology, biodiversity, and ecosystem functioning at the University of Zurich.



“These novel results fit with other recent findings of our research group, suggesting that over time evolutionary processes in diverse plant communities select the most ‘collaborative’ plant genotypes among the different species, thus increasing division of labor, community productivity and ecosystem stability,” added study senior author Bernhard Schmid, a biologist at the same university.&nbsp;



These findings suggest that, since ecosystem stability is crucial in the face of environmental perturbations, older and more diverse ecosystems should be valued and safeguarded in a rapidly changing world such as ours.



The study is published in the journal <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35189-2">Nature Communications</a>.



—



By <a href="mailto:andrei.ionescu5891@gmail.com">Andrei Ionescu</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Staff Writer



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Grassland ecosystem stability is driven by biodiversity

Recent studies have shown that the loss of species from...

Forest,Of,Seaweed

In a study led by the <a href="https://www.uaf.edu/">University of Alaska Fairbanks</a>, experts have concluded that kelp farms could help reduce coastal marine pollution. While this type of seaweed is known for its ability to take up large amounts of carbon dioxide, the new research suggests that kelp is even better at removing <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/reducing-nitrogen-oxide-pollution-could-boost-crop-yields/">nitrogen</a> pollution.&nbsp;



The researchers monitored carbon and nitrogen levels at two mixed-species kelp farms in Alaska, where tissue and seawater samples were collected for analysis. The results showed that some seaweed species are better than others at removing nitrogen from the surrounding water.&nbsp;



Study lead author Schery Umanzor is an assistant professor at UAF’s College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences.



“Some seaweeds are literally like sponges - they suck and suck and never saturate,” said Professor Umanzor.&nbsp;



“Although carbon and carbon sequestration by kelp receive most of the attention, kelp is actually much better at mitigating excessive amounts of nitrogen than carbon. I think that’s a story that’s really underlooked.”



Coastal nitrogen pollution has many sources, including agricultural runoff and urban sewage. This pollutant poses some major threats to ocean ecosystems such as harmful algal blooms and depleted oxygen levels that compromise the health of marine life.&nbsp;



In the UAF study, the kelp tissue samples revealed that ribbon kelp was more effective than sugar kelp at absorbing both nitrogen and carbon.&nbsp;



Kelp farming is also emerging as a promising way to improve food security. The researchers noted that kelp grown in polluted waters should not be used for food, but could still be a promising tool for helping to clean up the coastline.



Professor Umanzor cautioned that the study was limited to two sites during a single growing season, and is currently processing a larger collection of samples for further research.



The study is published in the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/aquaculture">Aquaculture Journal</a>.



---



By <a href="mailto:csexton@earth.com">Chrissy Sexton</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Editor



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Kelp farms could help clean up coastal nitrogen pollution

In a study led by the University of Alaska Fairbanks,...

It only takes one degree of warming to change a species, according to a new study led by the <a href="https://www.ntnu.edu/">Norwegian University of Science and Technology</a>. The researchers looked at the climate responses of individual species by analyzing natural history collections, which they say are an underexploited resource for long-term ecological research.



“Natural history collections can provide unique insight into a wide range of ecological responses over a period of time that is much greater than what most ecological monitoring programs manage. So the collections are an essential and invaluable source for ecological research over time," said study lead author Professor James D. M. Speed.



All of life on Earth is affected by the surrounding environment, so it is clear that climate change has an impact on species around the world. What is not as clear, however, is how each individual species will respond to specific changes in temperature.



“The climate affects the life cycle of species, the number of individuals of a species, the overall number of species and the composition and distribution of species in an area,” said Professor Speed.



To investigate how the climate affects individual species, the team set out to examine how plants and animals have been affected by temperature changes in Norway over a long period of time.



“We used museum collections that have been built up over 250 years to measure the ecological response to climate change in central Norway,” said Professor Speed. “We looked at a number of species, including vertebrates, invertebrates, plants and fungi."



Animal and plant specimens preserved in museum collections hold valuable insight into how we can expect climate change to progressively affect our world today.&nbsp;



“What these data and the objects in the museum collections have in common is that studying climate change was not one of their purposes when they were collected. Only now are we seeing that the collections are relevant and that we can use them for such a purpose,” said study co-author Tommy Prestø “It’s really interesting to be able to show that we can use the museum collections in new and innovative ways."



The results of the analysis clearly indicate that even a single degree of warming can induce major changes. The researchers found that:



<ul><li>The number of zooplankton decreases by almost 7,700 individuals per cubic meter of water per degree warmer in Jonsvatnet, a lake in Trondheim.</li><li>The number of nesting birds is decreasing by two fewer breeding territories per square kilometre per degree warmer in Budalen in Trøndelag county.</li><li>Flowering plants bloom earlier throughout Trøndelag, on average two days earlier per degree warmer.</li></ul>



The researchers also determined that when some species change, the life cycle of other species can change as well. “We can see a clear, regional connection with the climate,” said Professor Speed.



“For certain plant species, we’ve found that they’re flowering on average nine days earlier per century," said Presto. "This means that some of our plant species bloom three weeks earlier now than they did 250 years ago."



“But not everything changes with the climate. Some aspects of nature are more resilient. Overall, the distribution of species and species diversity stays stable over time. That surprised us,” said Professor Speed.



Fluctuations in the number of animals and species composition do not directly follow fluctuations in temperature, noted the researchers. A time period of 250 years can have both periods of warming and a stable climate, which means that species could have delayed responses to climate change.&nbsp;



The greatest immediate threat to plants and animals may be land-use changes such as deforestation. The International Nature Panel IPBES reports that land-use changes have had the largest relative negative impact on nature since 1970.



The study is published in the journal <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9471">Ecology and Evolution</a>.



---



By <a href="mailto:csexton@earth.com">Chrissy Sexton</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Editor



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Just one degree of warming can change a species

It only takes one degree of warming to change a...

Tree leaves have highly different lifespans. For instance, monkey puzzle tree leaves can live for over two decades, and Picea growing in the Chinese Gongga Mountains can thrive for thousands of years, growing in harsh environments with leaves that last about 20 years. On the other hand, maple leaves last only a season, and blueberry leaves may survive for just three months.&nbsp;



According to a recent study published in the journal <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.add5667">Science Advances</a>, these major differences are driven by the “economic” choices faced by different <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/in-tropical-forests-lightning-strikes-the-most-resilient-trees/">trees</a>.



“We already knew that conifers and other evergreen trees make longer-living leaves the closer they are to the poles,” said study lead author Han Wang, an expert in Plant Ecology at the <a href="https://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/">Tsinghua University</a> in Beijing. “Deciduous trees do the opposite. Their longest lasting leaves are found at the tropics.”



“And we knew that long-lived leaves tend to be tougher and thicker, and more expensive to build. Now, we have identified the major environmental factors at play, and summarized them in two equations. These leaf economic traits are fundamental to the carbon cycle and nutrient economy.”



The scientists tested their equations on data about thousands of tree species from hundreds of ecosystems worldwide. “Each species is essentially taking a punt on the best way to maximize carbon absorption,” said study co-author Ian Wright, a plant ecologist at the <a href="https://www.mq.edu.au/">Macquarie University</a> in Australia.



“Evergreen conifers growing in poor soil in areas with a long cold winter can only thrive if they make long term investments in their leaves. Whereas deciduous trees, like the maple, race to create new leaves and capture carbon in the summer sun before leaf-drop in autumn. The economically rational decision for a maple tree is to invest in fast growing, cheap but flimsy leaves.”



These findings have the potential of turning Ecology into a predictive science that will enable the construction of better, more accurate global and regional climate models, while allowing land managers to better model forests and other types of vegetation in order to predict how climate change will affect a variety of ecosystems, and farmers to better estimate crop yields and the impact of climate change on agriculture.



—



By <a href="mailto:andrei.ionescu5891@gmail.com">Andrei Ionescu</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Staff Writer



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Why do some leaves live longer than others?

Tree leaves have highly different lifespans. For instance, monkey puzzle...

A new study has revealed that <a href="https://www.earth.com/news/genetic-differences-in-fish-are-important-for-conservation/">conservation</a> efforts in Antarctica are insufficient to protect local wildlife. The research, led by Jasmine Rachael Lee at the <a href="https://www.uq.edu.au/">University of Queensland</a>, predicts population declines for 65 percent of all Antarctic wildlife by the end of the century.



"We find that implementing ten key threat management strategies in parallel, at an estimated present-day equivalent annual cost of US$23 million, could benefit up to 84 percent of Antarctic taxa," wrote the study authors.



"Climate change is identified as the most pervasive threat to Antarctic biodiversity and influencing global policy to effectively limit climate change is the most beneficial conservation strategy."



"However, minimizing impacts of human activities and improved planning and management of new infrastructure projects are cost-effective and will help to minimize regional threats. Simultaneous global and regional efforts are critical to secure Antarctic biodiversity for future generations."



The researchers set out to investigate which plant and animal species are most vulnerable and to identify the best actions.



The team analyzed existing data to evaluate threats and conservation strategies for Antarctica's wildlife. The scientists also asked 29 experts to define potential management strategies that are cost effective.&nbsp;



According to the results, the most serious threat to Antarctic biodiversity is climate change. If global warming exceeds the target of two degrees Celsius, 65 percent of Antarctic wildlife populations will be in s state of decline by the year 2100.



The experts said that as Antarctica faces increasing pressure from climate change and human activities, a combination of regional and global conservation efforts is needed to preserve Antarctic biodiversity and ecosystem services for future generations.



“What this work shows is that climate change is the greatest threat to Antarctic species and what we need is global mitigation efforts to save them," said study lead author Jasmine Lee. "This will not only help to secure their future, but also our own.”



The study is published in the journal <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001921">PLoS Biology</a>.



---



By <a href="mailto:csexton@earth.com">Chrissy Sexton</a>, <a href="https://www.earth.com/staff/">Earth.com</a> Editor



Check us out on <a href="https://www.earth.com/earthsnap/">EarthSnap</a>, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

Conservation efforts are not enough to save Antarctic wildlife

A new study has revealed that conservation efforts in Antarctica...

Fissidens edamensis

Taxonomic tree: