Adaptive Responses of Animals to Climate Change Are Most Likely Insufficient
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This is a peer-reviewed, final published version of the following document and is licensed under Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 license: Radchuk, Viktoriia, Reed, Thomas, Teplitsky, Céline, van de Pol, Martijn, Charmantier, Anne, Hassall, Christopher, Adamík, Peter, Adriaensen, Frank, Ahola, Markus, Arcese, Peter, Avilés, Jesús Miguel, Balbontin, Javier, Blanckenhorn, Wolf, Borras, Antoni, Burthe, Sarah, Clobert, Jean, Dehnhard, Nina, de Lope, Florentino, Dhondt, André A., Dingemanse, Niels J., Doi, Hideyuki, Eeva, Tapio, Fickel, Joerns, Filella, Iolanda, Fossøy, Frode, Goodenough, Anne E ORCID: 0000-0002-7662-6670, Hall, Stephen J.G., Hansson, Bengt, Harris, Michael, Hasselquist, Dennis, Hickler, Thomas, Joshi, Jasmin, Kharouba, Heather, Martínez, Juan Gabriel, Mihoub, Jean-Baptiste, Mills, James A., Molina-Morales, Mercedes, Moksnes, Arne, Ozgul, Arpat, Parejo, Deseada, Pilard, Philippe, Poisbleau, Maud, Rousset, Francois, Rödel, Mark-Oliver, Scott, David, Senar, Juan Carlos, Stefanescu, Constanti, Stokke, Bård G., Tamotsu, Kusano, Tarka, Maja, Tarwater, Corey, Thonicke, Kirsten, Thorley, Jack, Wilting, Andreas, Tryjanowski, Piotr, Merilä, Juha, Sheldon, Ben, Møller, Anders Pape, Matthysen, Erik, Janzen, Fredric, Dobson, Stephen, Visser, Marcel E., Beissinger, Steven R., Courtiol, Alexandre and Kramer-Schadt, Stephanie (2019) Adaptive responses of animals to climate change are most likely insufficient. Nature Communications, 10 (1). Art 3109. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-10924-4 Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10924-4 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10924-4 EPrint URI: http://eprints.glos.ac.uk/id/eprint/6574 Disclaimer The University of Gloucestershire has obtained warranties from all depositors as to their title in the material deposited and as to their right to deposit such material. The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation or warranties of commercial utility, title, or fitness for a particular purpose or any other warranty, express or implied in respect of any material deposited. The University of Gloucestershire makes no representation that the use of the materials will not infringe any patent, copyright, trademark or other property or proprietary rights. The University of Gloucestershire accepts no liability for any infringement of intellectual property rights in any material deposited but will remove such material from public view pending investigation in the event of an allegation of any such infringement. PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR TEXT. ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10924-4 OPEN Adaptive responses of animals to climate change are most likely insufficient Viktoriia Radchuk et al.# Biological responses to climate change have been widely documented across taxa and regions, but it remains unclear whether species are maintaining a good match between phenotype and environment, i.e. whether observed trait changes are adaptive. Here we 1234567890():,; reviewed 10,090 abstracts and extracted data from 71 studies reported in 58 relevant pub- lications, to assess quantitatively whether phenotypic trait changes associated with climate change are adaptive in animals. A meta-analysis focussing on birds, the taxon best repre- sented in our dataset, suggests that global warming has not systematically affected mor- phological traits, but has advanced phenological traits. We demonstrate that these advances are adaptive for some species, but imperfect as evidenced by the observed consistent selection for earlier timing. Application of a theoretical model indicates that the evolutionary load imposed by incomplete adaptive responses to ongoing climate change may already be threatening the persistence of species. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to V.R. (email: [email protected]). #A full list of authors and their affiliations appears at the end of the paper. NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | (2019) 10:3109 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10924-4 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications 1 ARTICLE NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10924-4 limate change can reduce the viability of species and fitness benefits (Fig. 1)10,11. These conditions are usually assessed associated biodiversity loss can impact ecosystem func- in isolation11–14 (but see, for example, refs. 7,8) and hence most C 1–3 tions and services . Fitness losses (i.e. reductions in studies can only speculate on whether adaptive responses have survival or reproductive rates) can be mitigated, however, if occurred. Here, we extracted data from many published studies to populations respond adaptively by undergoing morphological, assess these three conditions in free-living animals and thus physiological or behavioural changes that maintain an adequate determine whether the observed phenotypic changes are adaptive. match—or at least reduce the extent of mismatch—between Multiple studies report data satisfying the first two conditions. phenotype and environment. Such adaptive phenotypic changes In particular, increases in temperatures across multiple locations —which we call ‘adaptive response’ (to climate change)—come during recent decades are well documented (i.e. global warm- about via phenotypic plasticity, microevolution or a combination ing15). Similarly, the effects of climate change on several traits are of both, and can occur in tandem with geographic range shifts4–6. well characterized. For example, the timing of biological events, Quantifying adaptive responses, or demonstrating their absence such as reproduction or migration (hereafter ‘phenological despite directional selection, is important in a biodiversity con- traits’), has generally advanced across multiple taxa and servation context for predicting species’ abundances or locations13,16–18. ‘Morphological traits’, such as body size or distributions4,5 and for mitigating the effects of climate change on mass, have also responded to climate change, but show no general biodiversity by developing strategies tailored to species’ ecolo- systematic pattern8,14,19,20. gies4–6. A substantial challenge to test the third condition is that the Longitudinal studies of wild populations provide the oppor- data must be collected over multiple generations in single tunity to determine whether phenotypic changes are adaptive (e.g. populations. Existing datasets assembling data on either trait refs. 7–9). A phenotypic change qualifies as an adaptive response variation21–23 or selection24–26 across taxa, although valuable, are to climate change if three conditions are met: (1) a climatic factor not well suited for testing whether phenotypic trait changes are changes over time, (2) this climatic factor affects a phenotypic adaptive, because these two types of datasets rarely overlap in trait of a species and (3) the corresponding trait change confers terms of species, traits, study location and study period. Recently, b Condition 1c Condition 2 7.5 a 120 6.5 Trait Climate Trait 100 5.5 Clim Temperature (°C) Temperature 4.5 date Egg laying Year WMSD 80 1975 1985 1995 2005 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 Year Temperature (°C) f Condition 3 Fitness d Each year Adaptive e 1 0.3 Maladaptive Assessing WMSD 1.5 –0.1 0.5 0 Maladaptive Adaptive –0.5 Relative fitness Relative Weighted mean Weighted –1 selection differential –0.5 –1.5 –0.5 –0.1 0.3 –2 –1 0 1 2 Trait change over time Selection differential –2.5 Standardized trait (SD per year) 1975 1985 1995 2005 Year Fig. 1 A framework for inferring phenotypic adaptive responses using three conditions. a General framework. Arrows indicate hypothesized causal relationships, with dashed arrow indicating that we accounted for the effects associated with years when assessing the effect of climate on traits. b–f 69 demonstrate steps of the framework using as an example one study from our dataset—Wilson et al. b Condition 1 is assessed by βClim, the slope of a climatic variable on years, c Condition 2 is assessed by βTrait, the slope of the mean population trait values on climate. d Interim step: assessing the linear selection differentials (β). Note that each dot here represents an individual measurement in the respective year and not a population mean; analyses of selection were not performed here but in original publications, except for a few studies, thus inset d is a conceptual depiction and not based on real data. e To assess condition 3, first the weighted mean annual selection differential (WMSD) is estimated. f Condition 3 is then assessed by checking whether selection occurs in the same direction as the trait change over time, calculated as the product of the slopes from conditions 1 and 2. Red lines and font in b–f illustrate the predictions from model fits. Grey lines and font illustrate the lack of effect in each condition. As an example, if temperature increased over years (as shown by the red line in b), phenology advanced (depicted by the red line in c) and WMSD was negative (as depicted by the red line in e), then fitness benefits are associated with phenological advancement, reflecting an adaptive response (point falls in quadrant 3 in f). Source data are provided as a Source Data file 2 NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | (2019) 10:3109 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10924-4 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10924-4 ARTICLE Siepielski et al.27 assembled a global dataset combining climatic Fig. 2); therefore, we focused on the effects of temperature factors and selection in species and showed that precipitation, changes in the main text and provide