Only hardier species can adapt to global warming
Story submitted by Eric Worrall
Another claim that its worse than we thought – this time warmer temperatures are killing the bees.
According to Scott Groom, PhD student at Flinders University, mathematical modelling has connected changes in bee populations over the past 20,000 years across the South Pacific region, and exceptionally large declines in bee populations, with changes in temperature.
Groom says that prior to the ice age when temperatures rose, many bee species migrated to cooler areas, with only one hardy species able to adapt to the warmer temperature.
“They’re almost canaries in the coal mine, you can see that they’re going to be the first sort of species to be impacted by changes in climate,” Groom said.
The study, “Parallel responses of bees to Pleistocene climate change in three isolated archipelagos of the southwestern Pacific” can be found at the link below.
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/281/1785/20133293.abstract
Abstract
The impacts of glacial cycles on the geographical distribution and size of populations have been explored for numerous terrestrial and marine taxa. However, most studies have focused on high latitudes, with only a few focused on the response of biota to the last glacial maximum (LGM) in equatorial regions. Here, we examine how population sizes of key bee fauna in the southwest Pacific archipelagos of Fiji, Vanuatu and Samoa have fluctuated over the Quaternary. We show that all three island faunas suffered massive population declines, roughly corresponding in time to the LGM, followed by rapid expansion post-LGM. Our data therefore suggest that Pleistocene climate change has had major impacts across a very broad tropical region. While other studies indicate widespread Holarctic effects of the LGM, our data suggest a much wider range of latitudes, extending to the tropics, where these climate change repercussions were important. As key pollinators, the inferred changes in these bee faunas may have been critical in the development of the diverse Pacific island flora. The magnitude of these responses indicates future climate change scenarios may have alarming consequences for Pacific island systems involving pollinator-dependent plant communities and agricultural crops.
I don’t have access to the full text, so I don’t know whether other possible causes of population crashes, such as bee killing Varroa mites, were considered.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varroa .
Varroa mites were originally discovered in Asia, but have since spread worldwide. Some bees are resistant to Varroa mites, because they have evolved hygiene behaviour, which removes and kills the mites.
Great comments jimbo. Comprehensive!
Jimbo (and others) … having to work around all those “canaries in the coal mine” makes it very hard to get any constructive work done.
By the way, how do all of you find the time to read and comment on all of this???
DonM
Lasioglossum bees are small, ground nesting solitary bees. They don’t make honey or live in hives. The populations are reported to have crashed during the LGM, during the cold. Sea level was also much lower. This is not an hysterical “CAGA” sort of Climate Change paper, but one dealing with effects during real climate change. I wonder whether it was perhaps caused more by reductions in plant growth and thus floral resources during this time? Was this time not also a period of more drought?
It is very tiring that everyone immediately assumes European honey bees are the only bees in existence (and your “killer” bees are simply a strain of this species). Varroa is a parasite of honey bees (of various Apis species) but has no effect on solitary bees. The world is also not dependent on European honey bees for food – very few of your food calories come from honey bee pollinated crops in most westernised diets (hint – try wind). Bombus species are bumble bees.
They are talking about “climate change” getting colder
=====
“The impacts of glacial cycles on the geographical distribution and size of populations have been explored for numerous terrestrial and marine taxa. However, most studies have focused on high latitudes, with only a few focused on the response of biota to the last glacial maximum (LGM) in equatorial regions. ”
———
…….they are studying the effects of cold weather on the tropics
———–
“Here, we examine how population sizes of key bee fauna in the southwest Pacific archipelagos of Fiji, Vanuatu and Samoa have fluctuated over the The impacts of glacial cycles on the geographical distribution and size of populations have been explored for numerous terrestrial and marine taxa. However, most studies have focused on high latitudes, with only a few focused on the response of biota to the last glacial maximum (LGM) in equatorial regions. Here, we examine how population sizes of key bee fauna in the southwest Pacific archipelagos of Fiji, Vanuatu and Samoa have fluctuated over the Quaternary. ”
———-
………..the most recent of the glacier periods….they are looking at how it effected the tropics
———–
“We show that all three island faunas suffered massive population declines, roughly corresponding in time to the LGM,”
—————-
………massive declines during glacier periods
———–
” followed by rapid expansion post-LGM”
————–
….followed by rapids increases in populations after the glacier periods when it got warmer
—————-
“Our data therefore suggest that Pleistocene climate change ”
—————
…….when it’s colder
————-
“has had major impacts across a very broad tropical region.”
—————
….the cold/glaciation periods had major effects on the tropics and was not local to the NH
————————–
” While other studies indicate widespread Holarctic effects of the LGM,”
——————
…..while other studies indicate widespread northern latitude effect
————
“our data suggest a much wider range of latitudes, extending to the tropics, where these climate change repercussions were important.”
————-
……….our data suggest the cold effected the tropics
———-
” As key pollinators, the inferred changes in these bee faunas may have been critical in the development of the diverse Pacific island flora. The magnitude of these responses indicates future climate change scenarios ”
————
…not warmer, they are talking about future climate change scenarios getting colder
———-
“may have alarming consequences for Pacific island systems involving pollinator-dependent plant communities and agricultural crops.. We show that all three island faunas suffered massive population declines, roughly corresponding in time to the LGM,”
———–
…..massive population declines during glaciation
—————
” followed by rapid expansion post-LGM.”
——–
….followed by rapid expansion between glaciation when it got warmer
———–
” Our data therefore suggest that Pleistocene climate change has had major impacts across a very broad tropical region. While other studies indicate widespread Holarctic effects of the LGM,”
—————
………..our data shows that glaciation periods were not local and had major impacts over broad regions of the tropics while other studies indicate widespread northern latitude effects
——–
” our data suggest a much wider range of latitudes, extending to the tropics, where these climate change repercussions were important.”
———
…..got it?…..it was cold enough to effect bee colonies in the tropics, not local
————
” As key pollinators, the inferred changes in these bee faunas may have been critical in the development of the diverse Pacific island flora. The magnitude of these responses indicates future climate change scenarios may have alarming consequences for Pacific island systems involving pollinator-dependent plant communities and agricultural crops.”
———–
…future climate change scenarios that would effect bee faunas in the tropics = colder = glaciation
Latitude,
There you have it. Go AGW, yay!
Mark Bofill says:
May 9, 2014 at 1:45 pm
Did he actually say that in connection to his work, or did the reporter just mix it all up?
====
I think Eric said it……. 😉
Francisco, the answer to your question about the smiley was provided by Anthony here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/14/another-small-milestone-for-wuwt-2/
A better PhD study would be an examination of how climate change killed science process and critical thinking.
I love the compilation of Canary meets coal mine quotes!
I just happened to be flipping through an “Action Research” textbook before doing this web-browsing.
This coincidence of these two intellectual things made something clear to me:
In the 1940s, Frankfurt-School Marxist Kurt Levin coined the term “Action Research.” You can google all of this.
The idea of action research is that we intellectual people should not just waste our time developing scientific findings, in hopes of them somehow eventually morphing into public good, but we should help the process along.
In action research, your goal is to find problems to solve – usually some local oppression – then join the local oppressed community and use researchy methods to ACT – to CHANGE things.
Making things better is all good and fine. Shortening the time span from discovery of knowledge to benefit-reaping is all good.
The thing that occurred to me in reading the repetitive canary/coal mine quotes is that, beyond social sciences, the ethos of action research has a firm hold – it seems like we cannot think in any other mode than having any and all research be some valiant David-Vs-Goliath battle fighting off imminent tyranny or destruction.
This fits wit the observation that struck me a few years ago that every nature show has gone from Wild Kingdom isn’t nature fascinating and cool to Will the Wolf Survive the Imbalance in the Local Ecology?
We edumacated people have been brainwashed that we are desperately staving off disaster right and left – at least in our imaginations.
The canary-coal mine claims are so daft it hurts to read several in a row. Are we that brain-dead nowadays? I think so. Thanks, again, you Reds.
Irrespective of what may have been spouted in the press release, this paper has nothing to do with the honeybee Apis mellifera and nothing to do with global warming. So any and all comments relating to honeybees are without merit. I guess sometimes Mosher is right – you should read the paper or at least the abstract before commenting, but it seems only a handful of commentators (e.g. Latitude, Warrick, Mark B, MikeD, davidmh) bothered to do so.
I read the paper: it presents an analysis of the haplotypes (different kinds) of the barcode region of COI (a mitochondrial gene) of native solitary/subsocial bees (Halictidae) on Pacific islands. Groom et al. infer a genetic bottleneck that may have been coincident with the last Glacial Maximum – when Pacific islands may have been much drier (extreme cold isn’t suggested). So, possibly, when the glaciers were at their last maximum it was a tough time to be a native bee on a Pacific island.
The study is a house of cards, but may have some explanatory value. The fact that the authors seem to have let it be hijacked by a alarmist press release is depressing, but pretty standard operating procedure for any science that can be twisted into a political statement. That is the travesty here, not the paper. Well, the other travesty is the lack of rigour in most commentators – no wonder many scientists that might be more sympathetic to WUWT turn it off.
Note to Jimbo – European Honey Bee is still doing well in Australia because we don’t have Varroa – yet. Hawaii is the only other place I can think of that can say the same.
I prepare such lists and keep them for future use because I KNOW some idiot will come out with a global warming canary in a coalmine. I’m sure there are a lot more. The sources I used were wide ranging as the Google search engine does not necessarily list items in their new archives, scholar as well as the internet archive.
All those canaries….
but I see only galahs !
If you think people are going to read every single paper that pops up on WUWT then you have been smoking something. Alarmist press releases and drivel is like an avalanche – people have got stuff to do like earn a living instead of sitting behind climate models and pressing ENTER. Don’t blame commenters, blame the communicators because Warmists themselves say they need better communication.
I did not read the paper because when I tried I got this:
Mike Dubrasich
With the exception of davidmhoffer May 9, 2014 at 9:24 am, all commenters and the post author Worrall seem incapable of reading — but are excellent at brainless knee jerk condemnation.
Read what I posted a little more closely Mike.
From the Abstract:-
The magnitude of these responses indicates future climate change scenarios may have alarming consequences for Pacific island systems involving pollinator-dependent plant communities and agricultural crops.
There was another link which was accidentally not included in the post, a link to an interview with the author of the study, Scott Groom:-
http://www.foodmag.com.au/news/bees-akin-to-canaries-in-a-coal-mine-for-climate-c
Groom says that prior to the ice age when temperatures rose, many bee species migrated to cooler areas, with only one hardy species able to adapt to the warmer temperature.
“They’re almost canaries in the coal mine, you can see that they’re going to be the first sort of species to be impacted by changes in climate,” Groom said.
So yes, Scott is saying that extreme cold can kill bees. But he is also saying that temperature changes predicted by some model simulations of climate will also kill bees.
Since I don’t have access to the full text, I can’t see exactly what he said in the study, but from the abstract and the interview, Its obviously worse than we thought… 😉
old construction worker says:
May 9, 2014 at 11:58 am
Global warming is turning elephants into flies? Big problem. What happens if they can’t reach the ground before they evacuate?
I am sure you saw the press release but it does not appear on this page of WUWT. Why should commenters have to Google to find it (if it exists)? You should aim your fire somewhere else my friend.
At Number Watch’s list of impending global-warming disasters it can be inserted between
“beer worse” and
“beetle infestation”.
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
Mike Dubrasich looks like he is incapable of reading. He said:
He said we should have read the abstract at least. But that’s all I can do when it’s paywalled. Here is something in the abstract he said we can’t read.
PS I did not say the paper had anything to do with Apis mellifera. I was simply showing how bees can come from Europe to Australia and thrive. If you used your brain you would see exactly where the heck I was coming from. Read and THINK first.
I meant to bold
Here is the press release from http://phys.org/wire-news
It was Groom himself that spun it into global warming, while Mike tells us the paper has nothing to do with global warming. Mike also tells us that we can’t read. REAAAAAD that Mike.
Jimbo – unless I accidentally plagiarized Mike D, I think you are attributing something I said to him.
No need to get hot under the collar, I wasn’t picking on you, just noting that the lack of Varroa explains why Apis mellifera is still doing well in Australia. I thought you might be interested.
The front end of this comment thread is way off track and any biologist reading those comments would have to think that no one knew what they were spouting about. This is supposed to be a science-based site. Some care when commenting isn’t a bad thing and I’m sticking to my comment.
COMPARE AND CONTRAST.
But what’s this I see and READ?
If you are going to quote me then do just that. Nowhere did I say that the paper had anything to do with Apis mellifera. Mosher is sometimes right when he says people don’t read. The PHD student who wrote the paper made it into global warming in the press release itself! Yet DaveW wants to blame commenters. Well how about that folks!
I end my case. Good luck with your snearing attitude, I hope you have learned something today.
Nonsense! More models without reality. We live in northern Vermont and have kept bees for the last 9 years. We lost our first hive that tipped over in 70mph winds accompanying a normal spring storm dumping the hive into the April snow. We lost a second hive that was overrun when it was not strong enough to withstand a stronger nearby hive. The biggest losses are cold winters followed by bears. With one exception we have had Siberian bees that were raised in Vermont or Quebec that normally resist cold weather well. Varroa mites have not been a problem with our Siberian bees because of hive hygiene and varroa treatment. Bear predation is a problem for our neighboring beekeepers in Vermont despite electrified fencing and alarm systems. This winter almost every beekeeper in Vermont lost their hives due to spells of extreme cold followed by rain and warm weather through January. We had a strong hive going into the winter and left them with plenty of honey. We did not re-queen as we probably should have because it was such a strong hive. In our case the hive swarmed and left in January- probably heading for Florida.
The various state agriculture departments are still tallying the losses.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/compound-eye/2014/03/17/2013-2014-winter-honey-bee-losses-are-likely-to-be-large/
Hmmm, bees have been around so long that many plants have adapted to depend upon them for reproduction. Suddenly it’s the end of world (EOW)?