Believe it or not, that’s the actual headline from the Wildlife Conservation Society press release. This model they tout incorporates field data. – Anthony
Complex model performs better than common temperature threshold predictions
Recent forecasts on the impacts of climate change on the world’s coral reefs–especially ones generated from oceanic surface temperature data gathered by satellites–paint a grim picture for the future of the “rainforests of the sea.”
A newer and more complex model incorporating data from both environmental factors and field observations of coral responses to stress provides a better forecasting tool than the more widely used models and a more positive future for coral reefs, according to a new study by the Wildlife Conservation Society and other groups.
The study authors point out that, according to the climate stress index model first developed in 2008, coral reefs are responding to more factors than temperature and therefore more resilient to rising temperatures. They conclude that global climate change is the greatest global threat to coral reefs but the future of these ecosystems is more varied than predictions from the more widely used “temperature threshold” models.
The paper titled “Regional coral responses to climate disturbances and warming is predicted by multivariate stress model and not temperature threshold metrics” appears in the online edition of Climatic Change. The authors are: Timothy R. McClanahan of the Wildlife Conservation Society; Joseph Maina of the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Australia Research Council Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions; and Mebrahtu Ateweberhan of the Wildlife Conservation Society and the University of Warwick.
“Our new multivariate stress model suggests that the future of coral reefs is considerably more nuanced and spatially complex than predictions arising from the threshold models,” said Dr. Tim McClanahan, WCS’s Senior Conservation scientist and a co-author on the study. “According to our findings in the Western Indian Ocean, some places will do well and others will not. The key to accurate predictions is using all available environmental data and complementing it with on-the-ground observations on reef cover, coral communities, and other environmental variables that are key to understanding how corals respond to the interaction between all these variables.”
In the study, the authors compared the abilities of three common thermal threshold indices against a stress model that includes temperature but also light and water quality and movement variables and used the models to predict coral cover and susceptibility to bleaching during a past large stress event: specifically the 1997-98 coral bleaching event in the Western Indian Ocean. The field information used in the test included a compilation of 10 years of coral community data before the bleaching event, two years after the bleaching event, and data during the period of coral recovery between 2001-2005.
While the three temperature threshold models (sea surface temperature, cumulative thermal stress, and annual thermal stress) were highly variable with little agreement to field data after the 1998 rise in temperature and coral mortality, the multivariate model based on 11environmental variables combined using a fuzzy logic systems revealed a more accurate fit with the recorded coral cover and susceptibility in the recovery period that followed.
“This latest research suggests a more optimistic future for the world’s coral reefs,” said Dr. Caleb McClennen, Executive Director of WCS’s Marine Program. “The ability of certain coral communities to resist and recover from climatic factors provides hope for the future of the oceans. Our imperative is now to seek out and protect those locations that are refuges from climate change, and reduce other human stresses such as fisheries to ensure the long term survival of coral reefs.”
###
This research was supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association, and the World Bank Targeted Research Group on Coral Bleaching.
To access the article, go to: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-015-1399-x
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Coral is a survivor. (I wonder why this video is now non-existent.).
http://www.rtcc.org/2012/04/02/new-research-finds-some-corals-could-survive-climate-change/
In searching for the text associated with the missing video, I came up with this Youtube video address which might or might not be the right one. Hope that helps.
PS. I’m already sold. We are living through a Science event equivalent to Galileo or at least the Piltdown man. Will we reach the other side????
“They conclude that global climate change is the greatest global threat to coral reefs but the future of these ecosystems is more varied than predictions from the more widely used “
Got to say this to keep the money flowing in and also to get papers published.
Novel approach using observations to verify models.
A three line formatting test (I apologize)
“italics”boldunderlineChemistry: C₂H₅OH + HNO₃ → C₂H₅NO₃ + H₂OPhysics: ²³⁵U + ¹n → blam!
Thanks for IGNORING.
GoatGuy
[Better to use the “Test” thread for such formatting tests. .mod]
It’s nice to see some sense sneaking its way into the alarmist camp, however, it will be a mute point when the projected warming doesn’t come to fruition.
I’ve seen personally how bad of shape the barrier reef is off the coast of Belize but likewise have seen areas in the Caribbean where it is doing just fine. Sedimentation from development on shore and stirred up sediment from boats going too fast in the back reef seem to be common in the areas where the coral is bleached.
Sorry RW, But I have to go all grammar police on you. A guy I work with also gets this one wrong.
The figure of speech I believe you meant to use is a “moot point”, not a “mute point”.
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/96435/the-point-is-moot
https://languagerules.wordpress.com/2006/09/25/moot-point-not-mute-point/
[Depends on weather or not one wants the protested point being pointed out to be herd or knot. .mod]
it will be a mute point
====
speak up, can’t hear you.
“…the period of coral recovery between 2001-2005.”
How is it possible that there could even be a coral recovery during a time that ocean warming and acidification have been accelerating? Isn’t that what alarmists have been telling us this whole time?
the corals didn’t get the memo.
So, the mighty CO2 molecule, has failed, yet again, to meet the standards set by consensus science. It will however, still receive it’s annual bonus, awards and attend seminars in exotic locales. Such is the shape of bureaucracies and CO2 is just another bureaucratic tool.
CO2 is a shiftless lazy layabout, not doing what its told, and keeps getting eaten by plankton.
“It’s less worse than we thought”!
Coral likes warm, hates cold. When it gets really cold (during interglacials; ice ages) all the coral reefs in existence during the interglacial (like now) cease existence, totally, because coral cannot survive when it’s hundreds of feet above sea level. After the Eemian interglacial of 125,000 years ago, sea level fell over 400 feet and stayed that way for 100,000 years. The Great Barrier Reef, as we know it today, seemingly timeless, is only 10,000 years old, and is destined for death in the next few thousand years when the next glacial period inevitably takes hold. Environmentalists should save their concern for coral surviving what is provably the coolest phase of the past 10,000 years for when coral will truly meet its maker.
My goodness I was worried there for a moment. The more widely used models seemed to have concluded that evolutionary theory was no longer relevant. Apparently the climate community seemed to have discounted that environment drives adaption instead believing global temperature caused coral stress because it causes them stress. Fortunately a genius climate scientist must have picked up the book, “Evolution for Dummies” and realized local environmental factors and field study are probably pretty significant pieces towards understanding the life and evolution of coral reefs.
BTW wish they would use another word besides stress. Saying coral is not adapting fast enough to environmental changes makes sense, saying coral is stressed out is stupid. Regardless without a certain level of stress any species becomes stagnant and dies. Not enough stress can kill a species or culture just as well as excessive stress.
Saying coral is not adapting fast enough to environmental changes makes sense
=====================
coral has been around for hundreds of millions of years. they have survived disasters the wiped out almost all species on earth. could it be that they are adapting at the right speed to survive long term, and it is climate scientists that are mistaken in trying to determine how fast coral should adapt?
The notion that warmth destroys Coral has always puzzled me. The Red Sea is the warmest sea in the world (excluding so-called inland seas), but there’s plenty of Coral there. I’d have thought, in my cute layman way, that corals which die because of warming would be replaced by corals which like warmer water – isn’t that what Nature does?
corals which die because of warming would be replaced by corals which like warmer water
===========
which is exactly what happens. corals like warmth. they thrive in the tropics. they are much less common in cold water.
as the water warms, cold water species are replaced by warm water species. which also explains why we find no polar bears living in Indonesia and no giant monitor lizards living at the poles.
In general, nature is RESILIENT, including coral reefs. A recent paper by P.S. Kench and Colleagues (Geology,v.4, p. 515-518) shows that coral reefs grow in response to to sea level rise. Many animals are able to adapt to natural change. It’s harder for climate alarmists.
Sorry folks, when entering my ID, it didn’t input properly:
[?? .mod]
the future of coral reefs is considerably more nuanced and spatially complex than predictions arising from the threshold models,
================
if your neighbors moved out of their house and new tenants moved in, would you assume that the empty house meant your neighbors had died and their house would remain empty forever?
this is what the global warming models of coral bleaching assume. finally we see a study that at least checks to see what happens to coral after bleaching.
the number 1 problem with global warming studies of coral. the people doing the studies know next to nothing about the life cycle of coral. which makes sense. coral has been around a whole lot longer than humans. a whole lot longer.
you can be sure that climate science will go extinct long before corals.
Does make you wonder if any of these doomed coral predictors ever stop to wonder about the mere fact coral has been around for 100s of millions of years, through deep ice ages and tropical warming periods, and seems to have survived. Has it not occurred to them that coral already exists in the tropics and in Antarctica? That coral extends down far deeper depths than just the top 10m where it cherry pick the brightest sunlight?
Most coral reefs I’ve ever snorkled on has indeed been deeply impacted by man – but it seems to be blatent destruction by additional chemicals (fertilisers, sunscreen) or trawling by fishermen or blast fishing by locals. Now there is the REAL and immediate threat to coral reefs!
One of the biggest stresses on Coral reefs is dynamite fishing. A few years ago, I saw this all along the coast of Zanzibar and apparently it is still an on going problem.
See http://transparentsea.co/index.php?title=Tanzania:_Dynamite_fishing
There is weed refrences and that I think it is humorous that the actor who plays with Alistair is different the movies in each.