Many species face extinction risks owing to climate change, and there is an urgent need to identify which species' populations will be most vulnerable. Plasticity in heat tolerance, which includes acclimation or hardening, occurs when prior exposure to a warmer temperature changes an organism's upper thermal limit. The capacity for thermal acclimation could provide protection against warming, but prior work has found few generalizable patterns to explain variation in this trait. Here, we report the results of, to our knowledge, the first meta-analysis to examine within-species variation in thermal plasticity, using results from 20 studies (19 species) that quantified thermal acclimation capacities across 78 populations. We used meta-regression to evaluate two leading hypotheses. The climate variability hypothesis predicts that populations from more thermally variable habitats will have greater plasticity, while the trade-off hypothesis predicts that populations with the lowest heat tolerance will have the greatest plasticity. Our analysis indicates strong support for the trade-off hypothesis because populations with greater thermal tolerance had reduced plasticity. These results advance our understanding of variation in populations' susceptibility to climate change and imply that populations with the highest thermal tolerance may have limited phenotypic plasticity to adjust to ongoing climate warming.
Warming threatens biodiversity but there is considerable uncertainty in which species and ecosystems are most vulnerable. Moreover, our understanding of organismal sensitivity is largely centered on species level assessments, which do not consider variation across populations. Here, we used meta-analysis to quantify differentiation in thermal tolerance across 413 populations from 105 species living in terrestrial, marine, and freshwater realms. Strikingly, we found strong differentiation in heat tolerance across populations in marine and intertidal taxa but not terrestrial or freshwater taxa. This is counter to the expectation that increased dispersal potential in the ocean should reduce intraspeci c variation. Our ndings are consistent with the "Bogert effect" operating in terrestrial but not marine ecosystems, which predicts that behavioral thermoregulation constrains evolution. Such adaptive differentiation in the ocean suggests that there may be standing genetic variation at the species level to buffer climate impacts.Assessments of organismal vulnerability to warming, especially in marine species, should account for variation in thermal tolerance among populations or risk under-or overestimating climate vulnerability.
Warming threatens biodiversity but there is considerable uncertainty in which species and ecosystems are most vulnerable. Moreover, our understanding of organismal sensitivity is largely centered on species level assessments, which do not consider variation across populations. Here, we used meta-analysis to quantify differentiation in thermal tolerance across 413 populations from 105 species living in terrestrial, marine, and freshwater realms. Strikingly, we found strong differentiation in heat tolerance across populations in marine and intertidal taxa but not terrestrial or freshwater taxa. This is counter to the expectation that increased dispersal potential in the ocean should reduce intraspecific variation. Our findings are consistent with the “Bogert effect” operating in terrestrial but not marine ecosystems, which predicts that behavioral thermoregulation constrains evolution. Such adaptive differentiation in the ocean suggests that there may be standing genetic variation at the species level to buffer climate impacts. Assessments of organismal vulnerability to warming, especially in marine species, should account for variation in thermal tolerance among populations or risk under- or overestimating climate vulnerability.
Established non-native species can have significant impacts on native biodiversity without any possibility of complete eradication. In such cases, one management approach is functional eradication, the reduction of introduced species density below levels that cause unacceptable effects on the native community. Functional eradication may be particularly effective for species with limited dispersal ability, which may limit rates of reinvasion from distant populations. Here, we evaluate the potential for functional eradication of introduced predatory oyster drills (Urosalpinx cinerea) using a community science approach in San Francisco Bay. We combined observational surveys, targeted removals, and a caging experiment to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach in mitigating the mortality of prey Olympia oysters (Ostrea lurida), a conservation and restoration priority species. Despite the efforts of over 300 volunteers that removed over 30,000 oyster drills, we report limited success and discuss several possible mechanisms for this result with broad relevance to management for this and other introduced species. We also found a strong negative relationship between oyster drills and oysters, showing virtually no coexistence across eight sites. At two removal sites, there was no effect of oyster drill removal on oyster survival, which was only observed by caging treatment (0 and 1.6% survival in open and partial cage treatments, as compared to 89.1% in predator exclusion treatments). We conclude that functional eradication of this species requires significantly greater effort and may not be a viable management strategy. Oyster restoration efforts should not be undertaken where Urosalpinx is established or is likely to invade.
Established non-native species can have significant impacts on native biodiversity without any possibility of complete eradication. In such cases, one management approach is functional eradication, the reduction of introduced species density below levels that cause unacceptable effects on the native community. Functional eradication may be particularly effective for species with limited dispersal ability, which may limit rates of reinvasion from distant populations. Here, we evaluate the potential for functional eradication of introduced predatory oyster drills (Urosalpinx cinerea) using a community science approach in San Francisco Bay. We combined observational surveys, targeted removals, and a caging experiment to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach in mitigating the mortality of prey Olympia oysters (Ostrea lurida), a conservation and restoration priority species. Despite the efforts of over 300 volunteers that removed over 30,000 oyster drills, we report limited success and discuss several possible mechanisms for this result with broad relevance to management for this and other introduced species. We also found a strong negative relationship between oyster drills and oysters, showing virtually no coexistence across eight sites. At two removal sites, there was no effect of oyster drill removal on oyster survival, which was only observed by caging treatment (0 and 1.6% survival in open and partial cage treatments, as compared to 89.1% in predator exclusion treatments). We conclude that functional eradication of this species requires significantly greater effort and may not be a viable management strategy. Oyster restoration efforts should not be undertaken where Urosalpinx is established or is likely to invade.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.