Another modeled result, extrapolated all the way from 10 common fruit fly species to everything else in the insect world.
Extreme weather caused by climate change in the coming decades is likely to have profound implications for distributions of insects and other invertebrates. This is suggested by a new study of insects in tropical and temperate regions of Australia.
As climate change is progressing, the temperature of our planet increases. This is particularly important for the large group of animals that are cold-blooded (ectothermic), including insects. Their body temperature is ultimately determined by the ambient temperature, and the same therefore applies to the speed and efficiency of their vital biological processes.
- Fruit flies have been the model for a study that has shown how climate change may affect insect distribution in the future. (Photo: Ary A. Hoffmann)
But is it changes in average temperature or frequency of extreme temperature conditions that have the greatest impact on species distribution? This was the questions that a group of Danish and Australian researchers decided to examine in a number of insect species.
Johannes Overgaard, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Denmark, Michael R. Kearney and Ary A. Hoffmann, Melbourne University, Australia, recently published the results of these studies in the journal Global Change Biology. The results demonstrate that it is especially the extreme temperature events that define the distribution of both tropical and temperate species. Thus climate change affects ectotermic animals primarily because more periods of extreme weather are expected in the future.
Fruit flies were modelled
The researchers examined 10 fruit fly species of the genus Drosophila adapted to tropical and temperate regions of Australia. First they examined the temperatures for which the species can sustain growth and reproduction, and then they found the boundaries of tolerance for hot and cold temperatures.
“This is the first time ever where we have been able to compare the effects of extremes and changes in average conditions in a rigorous manner across a group of species”, mentions Ary Hoffmann.
Based on this knowledge and knowledge of the present distribution of the 10 species they then examined if distribution was correlated to the temperatures required for growth and reproduction or rather limited by their tolerance to extreme temperature conditions.
“The answer was unambiguous: it is the species’ tolerance to very cold or hot days that define their present distribution,” says Johannes Overgaard.
It is therefore the extreme weather events, such as heat waves or extremely cold conditions, which costs the insects their life, not an increase in average temperature.
- Periods of extreme heat and thus drought may be the cause of death for many insects. (Photo: COLOURBOX).
Drastic changes in store
With this information in hand, the researchers could then model how distributions are expected to change if climate change continues for the next 100 years.
Most terrestrial animals experience temperature variation on both daily and seasonal time scale, and they are adapted to these conditions. Thus, for a species to maintain its existence under varying temperature conditions there are two simple conditions that must be met. Firstly, the temperature should occasionally be such that the species can grow and reproduce, and secondly, the temperature must never be so extreme that the population’s survival is threatened.
In temperate climate for example, there are many species which are adapted to endure low temperatures in the winter, and then grow and reproduce in the summer. In warmer climates, the challenge may be just the opposite. Here, the species might endure high temperatures during the dry hot summer, while growth and reproduction mainly occurs during the mild and wet winter period.
The result was discouraging for all 10 species.
“Climate change will result in fewer cold days and nights, and thus allow species to move toward higher latitudes. However climate change also leads to a higher incidence to extremely hot days and our model therefore predicts that the distribution of these species will be reduced to less than half their present distribution”says Johannes Overgaard.
“In fact, our predictions are that some species would disappear entirely in the next few decades, even when they have a fairly wide distribution that currently covers hundreds of kilometers”, adds Ary Hoffmann.
“Although none of the 10 species studied are normally perceived as either harmful or beneficial organisms for human society, the results indicate that distribution of many insect species will be changed dramatically, and it will probably also apply to many of the species that have particular social or commercial importance “, ends Johannes Overgaard.
Source, Aarhus University: http://scitech.au.dk/en/roemer/feb14/ekstremt-vejr-afgoer-insekters-udbredelse/
From the Department Of Stating The Bleedin’ Obvious: “Thus, for a species to maintain its existence under varying temperature conditions there are two simple conditions that must be met. Firstly, the temperature should occasionally be such that the species can grow and reproduce, and secondly, the temperature must never be so extreme that the population’s survival is threatened.”
Glad to see the antipodean warmist loonies haven’t been too disheartened by Chris Turney’s exploits. Back in the real world, the university doesn’t have very far to look if they need to perform a bit of cost-cutting…
Look this is just fantastic news for science, not only is global warming real and upsetting the poor innocent insects but we now have proof that the Magic Pudding* (sarc off) introduced to Australian children by the the wonderful Norman Lindsay (sarc back on) has been discovered to exist in the form of climate science and public funding thereof.
What with an aging population and how are we goping to fund pensions and retirem,ent etc, the answer is at hand. We can all retrain as climate scientists in our senior years and carry on into our dotage without a care in the world and lots of overseas trips to conferences. How many climate change refugee fleas can we absorb into our domestic canine population? Who knows but it will keep a bunch of climate scientists busy for years.
* The Magic Pudding was one which no matter how much was eaten it regenerated or was otherwise endless.
I figure my bug spray does far more damage to the insects than global warming ever will. If the climate changes that much, it is the manufacturers of fly sprays that will suffer the most.
“Global Warming causes unemployment at chemical spray companies”.
They have done only half of the study because they have assumed that temperatures are going to go up.
What about the possibility that temperatures will go down?
Oh, of course, they need more money to do the other half of the experiments and make a new model. I suppose it keeps them off the street corners.
Plenty of insects here in tropical Australia, mate. May that pesky CAGW that caused me to move to the tropics in the first place kill a few off, please?
I think that the confidence that many posters express here in the ability of evolution to adapt to the changing climate is well founded. Only a small proportion of the insect population became extinct with the ice-age to interstadial transition.
However insect ecology is usually closely linked to the plant species they interact with. The insects will follow the plants and as growth and hardiness regions change with climate warming the insects will follow.
http://www.mnn.com/your-home/organic-farming-gardening/blogs/climate-change-gives-gardeners-new-options
The other problem is that international trade enables tropical insects previously confined to a specific region on one continent the opportunity to invade globally where there may not be the natural predation to control them. Local species can then be wiped out by competition from fitter foreign insects.
That research that found left wingers lack the logic gene has been confirmed yet again. It is a worrying time for the left in Australia. The new government is determined to cut spending and some of those cuts will fall on such things as the dubious research associated with AGW. Don’t forget these so called scientists are facing many years of unemployment.
Since this study is based on a model, I guess the results are only valid for spherical insects that reproduce in the vacuum.
Well that is interesting. The actual points of the study- it is not average temperatures that kill the insects, but ‘extreme’ events that do.
So we can now see that once again skeptics were right on that point:
The small actual changes in temperatures that AGW represents are not killing the environment.
So we are left with so-called ‘extreme’ events.
And an honest review of so-called ‘extreme’ events shows they are not increasing significantly.
Yet the study promoters and those who reported on the study imply the opposite.
What is it about anything touching climate that inspires AGW promoters and believers to mislead people?
As many have pointed out, this is another example of horrific “science” that infests what passes for climate science today. I believe a decent statistician could spend an entire chapter on what is wrong with this “study” in his/her new book “Big Fat Liars, and the Statistical Lies they Tell”. (a book that needs to be written by the way)
The point that I would make however, is that the process of evolution whereby species adapt to changing conditions seems to have been totally overlooked in the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming fairy tale. Darwin, call your office!
Models and guesswork all the way , and in the end what do they show . That AGW ‘research’ bucket is still deep and well filled and that there are still plenty of people happy to dip into and feed ‘the cause ‘ no matter how poor the science.
Correct me if I’m wrong someone, but aren’t fruit flies used in lab experiments by real scientists, specifically because they adapt readily to change and therefore make suitable topics for genetic study?
Not sure about that. My impression was that they were used mostly because of the short life span and because they were easy to grow. Now there are other models more suitable for genetic studies. Arabidopsis thaliana and Echerichia coli are the preferred species right now. And one fish which I cannot recall its name.
Zebrafish!!! Thanks wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_organism
Izen says:
“…adapt to the changing climate…”
The climate is always changing. Always has, always will. Furthermore, there is nothing happening now that is either unusual, or unprecedented. Everything currently being observed has happened before, and to a much greater degree.
Now, you were saying… ?
20 Feb: BBC: Marshall Islands: Islands ‘grow back’ after Pacific storm
A powerful typhoon in 1905 killed all but two inhabitants of the Nadikdik Atoll – part of the Marshall Islands – and washed away most of the islands’ landmass. But the islands seem to have re-established themselves – one has become a fully vegetated, stable island again – while several smaller islands have reappeared and formed into a single, larger landmass, the New Zealand Herald reports…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-26275034
As soon as I saw the words “our models…” I knew that it was all bogus. It’s models all the way down, nothing but models. Does anyone do observational / experimental research anymore?
As an Aussie I can only apologise for the quality of the so called scientific studies emanating from my fair land. Recently we have changed direction, the last administration funded this cr#p.
It is our hope that our research in the future will be less inane, I was led to believe that fruit flies were the domain of Dr Suzuki. I do feel some what ashamed that Australia has produced so many
self serving idiots in such a short span of time.
But the times they are a changing.
Yep, this one ranks right up there along with “Expect Smaller Brains with Global Warming” by Dr. Ellen Weber …. which, of course, is the cause of all that follows !!
http://www.brainbasedbusiness.com/2007/03/expect_smaller_brains.html
Every variation is a change but not every change is a variation. How can one tell the novel from the old and familiar in new guises? That’s the enigma.
So-called ‘climate change’ could simply be the same old physical system doing a not at all unprecedented thing. (The physical system that is land, Moon, Sun, sea and air has known far greater levels of CO2 before – as have the species now living)
I wonder if Ixodes hard-bodied ticks might not exhaust the AGW econauts supply of adhockeries. The ticks have a wonderfully complicated lifecycle that is precisely synchronized across generation of four stages, while being capable of moving only a few meters on their own.
Warning from Canada……………
David Suzuki got his PhD. on fruit flies.
Expect copius ranting and raving from him once he sees this.
Also, more charge against certain individual of “Crimes against Humanity”
oh another study that uses , may, might or could.
“Fruit flies have been the model for a study that has shown how climate change may affect insect distribution in the future”
In the mad. mad, mad, world of climate change you can say anything you like in a study with might , may or could. It’s how the advertising industry works, making claims on products without actually having to be correct by using weasily words.
My study showed that climbing ladders in the future may cause more injuries to climate change.
more injuries due to climate change
Can I call this obvious? For example human heatwave deaths at 47C, hypothermia deaths at -10C as opposed to a temperature rise from 18C up to 25C.