Climate change, metabolism, and the future of life histories

Santiago SalinasJorge Velasquez-Tibata

Stephan B. Munch

Long-term projectionsneeded in recovery plans.Help, Nostradamus!

Effects of temp areoften absent in forecasts.

Quite erroneous.

7

Summary for Policymakers

8 For an explanation of SRES emissions scenarios, see Box ‘SRES scenarios’ in Topic 3 of this Synthesis Report. These scenarios do not includeadditional climate policies above current ones; more recent studies differ with respect to UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol inclusion.9 Emission pathways of mitigation scenarios are discussed in Section 5.

3. Projected climate changeand its impacts

There is high agreement and much evidence that withcurrent climate change mitigation policies and related sus-tainable development practices, global GHG emissionswill continue to grow over the next few decades. {3.1}

The IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES,2000) projects an increase of global GHG emissions by 25 to90% (CO2-eq) between 2000 and 2030 (Figure SPM.5), withfossil fuels maintaining their dominant position in the global en-ergy mix to 2030 and beyond. More recent scenarios withoutadditional emissions mitigation are comparable in range.8,9 {3.1}

Continued GHG emissions at or above current rateswould cause further warming and induce many changesin the global climate system during the 21st century thatwould very likely be larger than those observed duringthe 20th century (Table SPM.1, Figure SPM.5). {3.2.1}

For the next two decades a warming of about 0.2°C per de-cade is projected for a range of SRES emissions scenarios. Evenif the concentrations of all GHGs and aerosols had been keptconstant at year 2000 levels, a further warming of about 0.1°Cper decade would be expected. Afterwards, temperature projec-tions increasingly depend on specific emissions scenarios. {3.2}

The range of projections (Table SPM.1) is broadly con-sistent with the TAR, but uncertainties and upper ranges fortemperature are larger mainly because the broader range ofavailable models suggests stronger climate-carbon cycle feed-backs. Warming reduces terrestrial and ocean uptake of atmo-spheric CO2, increasing the fraction of anthropogenic emis-sions remaining in the atmosphere. The strength of this feed-back effect varies markedly among models. {2.3, 3.2.1}

Because understanding of some important effects drivingsea level rise is too limited, this report does not assess thelikelihood, nor provide a best estimate or an upper bound forsea level rise. Table SPM.1 shows model-based projections

Scenarios for GHG emissions from 2000 to 2100 (in the absence of additional climate policies)and projections of surface temperatures

Figure SPM.5. Left Panel: Global GHG emissions (in GtCO2-eq) in the absence of climate policies: six illustrative SRES marker scenarios(coloured lines) and the 80th percentile range of recent scenarios published since SRES (post-SRES) (gray shaded area). Dashed lines show thefull range of post-SRES scenarios. The emissions include CO2, CH4, N2O and F-gases. Right Panel: Solid lines are multi-model global averagesof surface warming for scenarios A2, A1B and B1, shown as continuations of the 20th-century simulations. These projections also take intoaccount emissions of short-lived GHGs and aerosols. The pink line is not a scenario, but is for Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Model(AOGCM) simulations where atmospheric concentrations are held constant at year 2000 values. The bars at the right of the figure indicate thebest estimate (solid line within each bar) and the likely range assessed for the six SRES marker scenarios at 2090-2099. All temperatures arerelative to the period 1980-1999. {Figures 3.1 and 3.2}

A1B

B1

A2

B2

Glo

bal G

HG

em

issi

ons

(GtC

O2-

eq /

yr)

Glo

bal s

urfa

ce w

arm

ing

(o C)

Year 2000 constantconcentrations

post-SRES (max)

post-SRES (min)

post-SRES range (80%)

A1FI

A1T

20 centuryth

2000 2100 1900 2000 2100Year Year

IPCC 2007

Up goes mercury.Temperature increasinglots in the future.

Heat is important.Now how do we account for

this plasticity?

Davidowitz and Nijhout. 2004. Integr Comp Biol

Brown et al. 2007. Ecology

Boltzmann’s factor

!"#$%&'(()*+,"(*$'($+

-,./'."(+0(0123+

40&501'$610+

inverse Boltzmann’s factor

!"#$%&'(()*+,"(*$'($+

-,./'."(+0(0123+

40&501'$610+e

!"#$"%&'(%")

*%+,

'-)

!"#$"%&'(%")

*+,"-$&.)

Boltzmann’s factor comesto the rescue with his palthe inverse Boltzmann.

Munch and Salinas. 2009. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA

!"#$%&'$

!"($%&'$

!"($%&'$(")$%&'$

("*$%&'$("($%&'$

("+$%&'$

,"*-.$)"/-.$

+("+-.$

+#"(-.$

(("/-.$

This frameworks predictslifespan increases to northwithin a species.

!"#$"%&'(%")

*+,"-$&.)

!

lifespan" eEkT

And it works all rightfor this sixty-seven ectos.Thanks, Web of Science.

Salinas et al. In prep.

And also works fordevelopment and growthoh, what a framework!

!"

#"

$!"

$#"

%!"

%#"

!" #" $!" $#" %!" %#"

!"#"$%&'

"()*+

'"*,-.*

/"'&"01)20"*,3.*

Salinas et al. In prep.

And also works fordevelopment and growthoh, what a framework!

Individual growth rate Population growth rate

!"

#"

$"

%"

&"

'"

!" '" #!" #'" $!" $'" %!"! "

#$%&'

()*%

+,"-,!#./!,%&01*%

!"

#"

$!"

$#"

%!"

%#"

&!"

!" #" $!" $#"

!"#$

%&'"(

%)'*+

+',"-./'

0)+1)"(%2")'*#3/'

We can use it notjust along gradients, butacross Father Time.

To predict changesthat, for instance, may occurto perch in Europe.

example

Today perch dies latein the cold north of Sweden;young, in balmy Spain.

!"

#"

$!"

$#"

%!"

%#"

&'" (%" ('" #%" #'" )%" )'" '%"

!"#$%

&%'"()'*+,'

-"./&0)'

Swedish perch will liveshorter lives in the future:two point five years less.

!"

#"

$!"

$#"

%!"

%#"

&'" (%" ('" #%" #'" )%" )'" '%"

!"#$%

&%'"()'*+,'

-"./&0)'

*+,"%!#!"

!"

#"

$!"

$#"

%!"

%#"

&'" (%" ('" #%" #'" )%" )'" '%"

!"#$%

&%'"()'*+,'

-"./&0)'

*+,"%!#!"

And will live as longas German perch do today--just like a move south.

Of course other traitswill be a-changing as well.Next slide for details.

Assume we know zipabout growth of the perch. Wecan still calculate

percent change in agiven trait that is likely tooccur in one place.

!"#$%&!"#$#%&'

% change

In our Swedish fish,calculations below showexpected changes.

!

e0.63

(8.62"10#5 )276.3

!

e0.63

(8.62"10#5 )278.6% change

GROWTH 19%

in the next 50 yrs

In just the same waywe can calculate changesanywhere worldwide.

A2 scenario

B1 scenario

!"#$%$#&'()*+,-./)+'.0)

1,2&('3,")*+,-./)+'.0)

I’m from the true south.How much will ectotherms change?

‘round fifteen percent.

!"#$%&'()*$+$,-&.$(/)0'/$)

A2 scenario

B1 scenario

In much the same vein,cold-blooded critters will live

ten to fifteen less

Temp can fast forwardthe pace of life. By how much?Boltzmann will tell you.

Thank you for your ears.Questions? Concerns? Discussionafter session’s end.