Basic premise of this paper: 1. let’s take fish out of their natural ocean environment, 2. put ’em in a tank where they are stressed, 3. crank up the temperature, 4. see if any fish die, 5. count dead fish, 6. assume natural adaptation is impossible 7. report news of future doom to the world via press release.
Via Eurekalert:
According to an international team of researchers, the rapid pace of climate change is threatening the future presence of fish near the equator. “Our studies found that one species of fish could not even survive in water just three degrees Celsius warmer than what it lives in now,” says the lead author of the study, Dr Jodie Rummer from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University.
Dr Rummer and her colleagues studied six common species of fish living on coral reefs near the equator. She says many species in this region only experience a very narrow range of temperatures over their entire lives, and so are likely adapted to perform best at those temperatures.
This means climate change places equatorial marine species most at risk, as oceans are projected to warm by two to three degrees Celsius by the end of this century.
“Such an increase in warming leads to a loss of performance,” Dr Rummer explains. “Already, we found four species of fish are living at or above the temperatures at which they function best.”
The team measured the rates at which fish use oxygen, the fuel for metabolism, across different temperatures – at rest and during maximal performance. According to the results, at warmer temperatures fish lose scope for performance. In the wild, this would limit activities crucial to survival, such as evading predators, finding food, and generating sufficient energy to breed.
Because many of the Earth’s equatorial populations are now living close to their thermal limits, there are dire consequences ahead if these fish cannot adapt to the pace at which oceans are warming.
Dr Rummer suggests there will be declines in fish populations as species may move away from the equator to find refuge in areas with more forgiving temperatures.
“This will have a substantial impact on the human societies that depend on these fish,” she says.
A concentration of developing countries lies in the equatorial zone, where fish are crucial to the livelihoods and survival of millions of people, including those in Papua New Guinea and Indonesia.
In an era of rapid climate change, understanding the link between an organism and its environment is crucial to developing management strategies for the conservation of marine biodiversity and the sustainable use of marine fisheries.
“This is particularly urgent when considering food security for human communities.”
‘Life on the edge: thermal optima for aerobic scope of equatorial reef fishes are close to current day temperatures’ by Jodie Rummer, Christine Couturier, Jonathan Stecyk, Naomi Gardiner, Jeff Kinch, Goran Nilsson and Philip Munday, appears in Global Change Biology.
Abstract
Equatorial populations of marine species are predicted to be most impacted by global warming because they could be adapted to a narrow range of temperatures in their local environment. We investigated the thermal range at which aerobic metabolic performance is optimum in equatorial populations of coral reef fish in northern Papua New Guinea. Four species of damselfishes and two species of cardinal fishes were held for 14 days at 29, 31, 33, and 34 °C, which incorporated their existing thermal range (29–31 °C) as well as projected increases in ocean surface temperatures of up to 3 °C by the end of this century. Resting and maximum oxygen consumption rates were measured for each species at each temperature and used to calculate the thermal reaction norm of aerobic scope. Our results indicate that one of the six species, Chromis atripectoralis, is already living above its thermal optimum of 29 °C. The other five species appeared to be living close to their thermal optima (ca. 31 °C). Aerobic scope was significantly reduced in all species, and approached zero for two species at 3 °C above current-day temperatures. One species was unable to survive even short-term exposure to 34 °C. Our results indicate that low-latitude reef fish populations are living close to their thermal optima and may be more sensitive to ocean warming than higher-latitude populations. Even relatively small temperature increases (2–3 °C) could result in population declines and potentially redistribution of equatorial species to higher latitudes if adaptation cannot keep pace.
=============================================================
UPDATE: from comments –
Even relatively small temperature increases (2–3 °C) could result in population declines and potentially redistribution of equatorial species to higher latitudes if adaptation cannot keep pace.
But what’s this I see? Acclimatization of the damselfish mentioned above! Good grief, we can’t have this.
Abstract – 2013
Evidence for developmental thermal acclimation in the damselfish, Pomacentrus moluccensis
Tropical species are predicted to have limited capacity for acclimation to global warming. This study investigated the potential for developmental thermal acclimation by the tropical damselfish Pomacentrus moluccensis to ocean temperatures predicted to occur over the next 50–100 years. Newly settled juveniles were reared for 4 months in four temperature treatments, consisting of the current-day summer average (28.5 °C) and up to 3 °C above the average (29.5, 30.5 and 31.5 °C). Resting metabolic rate (RMR) of fish reared at 29.5 and 31.5 °C was significantly higher than the control group reared at 28.5 °C. In contrast, RMR of fish reared at 30.5 °C was not significantly different from the control group, indicating these fish had acclimated to their rearing temperature. Furthermore, fish that developed in 30.5 and 31.5 °C exhibited an enhanced ability to deal with acute temperature increases. These findings illustrate that developmental acclimation may help coral reef fish cope with warming ocean temperatures.
Kevin Kilty says:
February 11, 2014 at 7:30 am
A self-named Center of Excellence. Indeed.
—-
As someone familiar with this University, I can confirm that they call themselves a Centre of Excellence for the same reason that North Korea calls itself a Democratic People’s Republic ….
One of the few things warmists, sceptics and models all seem to agree upon is that any GW will be greatest in polar regions and least in equatorial regions. A three degree rise in equatorial regions would suggest an average warming well outside the 95% confidence limits of the IPCC’s predictions.
What i want to know is what effect rising ocean temperatures will have on the number of Sharknadoes.
Eugene WR Gallun
It doesn’t really matter! Evolution is ‘adapt or die’. If some species die others will replace them. It is what life is all about.
It would be absurd for Mankind to say we must stop evolution at all costs and that no species should ever go extinct. Unfortunately this kind of attitude has some powerful adherents. Eg. The ‘Federal Endangered Species Act’ can ruffle a few feathers, such as the dunes sagebrush lizard – see link.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/14/us/rare-lizard-is-protected-but-not-put-on-endangered-list.html?_r=0
Some creatures may adapt to the ecology of an area and become a sub-species. This does not mean they should be preserved forever, they are rare for a reason.
There are exceptions when creatures are critical to the environment, such as the rhinoceros in parts of Africa for their nitrogen fixing bacteria. Also their problem is poaching not a changing environment.
Anthony ,
For a laugh see “They’re usually so peaceful” , Daily Telegraph Tim Blair Blog,December 4,2009.
The researchers were” torturing “damselfish then and claimed that warming coastal waters caused by climate change would also enrage sharks around Australia!
An oldie but goodie.
As I recall, when I studied comparative animal physiology in the 1960’s, the leading reference texts were using terms such as stenothermal (organisms that only survive in a narrow temperature range) versus eurythermal (survived in a wide range of environmental temperature); and poikilothermal (“cold-blooded” organisms whose internal temperature tracked that of their environment) or homeothermal (organisms that regulate their internal temperature within a narrow range–such as mammals and birds). Analogous terms were used for other environmental stressors ( e.g., stenohaline v. euryhaline for salt tolerance). Experiments exploring the details of thermal adaptation and regulation were “classic” even then.
It is disconcerting to see long-established, basic principles of animal physiology being republished with copy-cat science-fair experiments and results packaged as harbingers of thermal doomsday. As if it hasn’t been clarion clear that stenotherms will have a tough go of it outside their physiological survival range. I’m sure there are “countless” other fish and sea creatures that have stenothermal “vulnerabilities.” The reseacher’s can enjoy several lifetimes meticulously documenting such species and notifying the world of the impending danger. Imagine length of the CV’s–possibly Nobel Prize worthy.
I imagine they used sea water, and didn’t just add sea salt to fresh water. Not reading instructions properly my son killed his Oscar by adding too much aquarium salt. The temperatures around reefs fluctuate but the lower depths are quite cold even after 10 feet. If it gets too hot, they just move away. I have kept cold water, tropical and marine fish in aquariums. And marine fish have to have a balance of of salt that is measured by a hydrometer in the tank. As the sea water evaporates, the salt content is increased, so you add just plain old fresh water or rain water to balance it. Once established tropical marine fish are usually very happy. Yet they are difficult to establish as most are not bred in captivity and when caught from the wild, stress badly, and won’t eat the food we give them. But using unpolluted sea water you stand it in black containers for a month to kill off any bacteria or plankton that will not live in an aquarium. As far as temps well any fish will not like it if the temps increase a lot, marine fish especially. But if in the wild they generally like warmer temps as there is more food to eat. But as far as temps are concerned, some fish have adapted to live in salt water and fresh water, like bull sharks. Why don’t they experiment with them. Because they are a danger to human beings especially if you wade into a golf course water pond to retrieve your golf ball!! This has happened in Australia in Queensland when after floods, bull sharks invaded a well known golf course. Temperatures didn’t worry them. LOL.
‘ Curt says:
February 11, 2014 at 9:09 am
Amazing how belief in climate change trumps belief in evolution by natural selection. These guys are effectively creationists!’
You are being unfair to the Creationists. They have no issues at all with ‘Micro’ evolution, or adaptation by natural selection. It’s Dino’s to Birdies stuff they don’t agree with.
They have no problem with accepting that as plants do better at 1000-3000ppmv then at some point these plants must have been created (or adapted) to live in an atmosphere that contained at least that much Co2 – which makes them more ‘sciencey’ than the warmist’s who cannot see that obvious point.
Bolivia – Coldest temps in nearly half a century kill 6 million fish,
Researchers also noted that when the temp was turned up to 200 degrees the fish were delicious. But seriously, the surface water temp in the mid- Caribbean, say off Grand Cayman, is in the high 70’s F to low 80’sF, with slight seasonal variation.( making seasonal variation already a 3 degree C change) The thermocline there, as in much of the Caribbean, occurs at a depth of 400 to 800 feet. Below that the temp doesn’t seasonally change through out the whole of the Caribbean. However it does get colder at depth, remember the depths here are extreme, the Cayman trench is in excess of 25,000 feet deep. At that depth the water temp is a constant 40F @ur momisugly 750 atmospheres pressure. So pressure density makes temp stability difficult to change..(unless you subscribe to the notion that all of the heat is hiding in the deep ocean). Point is that the fish will be Okay.
In the above post where 6 million fish died; who counted those fish?
Are you sure this isn’t a fifth-grade Science Fair? Oh wait, these scientists are NOT smarter than fifth-graders!
80 years is probably 80 generations. Individuals may not adapt but fish lay many thousands of eggs each generation. As the temp rises (if it does) the fish able to adapt to warmer temps will out breed more successfully than those that can’t. Over 80 generations of very slow temp rising the fish will be just fine.
This reminds me of a “study” I once read that among other gems wondered if corn could even survive 8 degrees warmer then the US cornbelt. (hint: corn is from mexico and not only handles but even thrives at temps much higher then 8 degree warmer then the cornbelt.) It was enough to wonder if they even knew what corn actually was.
So not only has the crowd that says the Earth is flat jumped onto the “man-made global warming is killing the planet” train, now also scientists essentially say evolution can’t happen.
I don’t even…
==================================================================
Don’t you know? All “change” is bad if there is some way to blame (and fleece) Man.