Climate Change Impact on Eco-biology and Socio-economy …
537
the “extinction vortex” well before they lose their habitat (Jetz et al. 2007; Malcolm
et al. 2006; Willis and Bhagwat 2009). The ‘International Union for Conservation of
Nature (IUCN) Red List of the conservation status of plant and animal species’ (Baillie et al. 2004) includes 90 highly vulnerable biological traits based on their habitat
specificity, limited environmental tolerance, dependence on specific environmental
activators, dependence on inter-specific interactions or restricted ability to disperse
to or colonize a new range (Foden et al. 2008). Many models have been developed to
estimate this species loss (both local and non-local). It is predicted that due to intermediate climate warming 15–37% of species will suffer extinction by 2050 (Thomas
et al. 2004). Among all the vulnerable species, particularly birds are very sensitive to
climate change. It was found that by 2100 approximately 0.3% of the world’s 8750
land bird species (Jetz et al. 2007) and up to 30% of the Western Hemisphere’s 8400
land bird species could go extinct (Sekercioglu et al. 2008) because of changing
climate. After few studies done on vulnerability of 25 major biodiversity hotspots,
it was predicted that, in long run 56,000 endemic plant species and 3700 endemic
vertebrate species will be lost (Malcolm et al. 2006). Based on the data analysed from
9856 birds, 6222 amphibians and 799 coral reefs, IUCN has estimated that about
35% of the world’s birds, 52% of amphibians and 71% of warm-water reef-building
corals are going to face negative effect of climate change (Foden et al. 2008). A
detailed study was conducted on Amazon basin, central Indo-west Pacific (Coral
Triangle) for birds, amphibians and corals (16,857 species) and depicted that 608–
851 bird species (6–9%), 670–933 amphibian (11–15%), and 47–73 coral species
(6–9%) were vulnerable due to climate change and already threatened with extinction on the IUCN Red List (Foden et al. 2013). While projecting the species loss, it
has been found that chances of local extinctions are significantly higher than that of
global extinctions. Global multi-taxon meta-analysis data generated from recorded
ecological responses projected that mean observed extinction risk (by 2100) is much
higher than the mean predicted extinction risk; e.g. 12.6% in plants (vs. 4% predicted), 9.4% in invertebrates (vs. 7.2% predicted) and 17.7% in vertebrates (vs.
12.4% predicted). Overall, these systematic biodiversity losses are really alarming
for our planet’s health (Maclean and Wilson 2011). It is important to mention here
that only climate change is not the reason for species loss but other natural processes (e.g. changes in land use and cover, introduction of invasive species, species
interactions within ecological networks etc.) are also contributing to this.
Conservation is also facing some unexpected challenges due to global temperature
alteration. It was found that in warmer conditions, painted turtle (Chrysemys picta)
eggs raised to produce female offspring, whereas under cooler conditions males were
predominant (Janzen 1994). This evidence showed that painted turtles are going to
suffer local extinctions in the near future. Climate warming also pose significant
effects on the population and reproductive biology of different organisms. Due to
warmer winter in southern Norway, population dynamics of dippers (Cinclus cinclus)
had changed and increase in population size was noticed (Saether et al. 2000). In
Germany, Pied Flycatchers (Ficedula hypoleuca) and Reed Warblers (Acrocephalus
scirpaceus) showed positive effect in their reproduction which was supposed to be
associated with climate warming of 1.38 °C in spring time (Winkel and Hudde 1997;
537
the “extinction vortex” well before they lose their habitat (Jetz et al. 2007; Malcolm
et al. 2006; Willis and Bhagwat 2009). The ‘International Union for Conservation of
Nature (IUCN) Red List of the conservation status of plant and animal species’ (Baillie et al. 2004) includes 90 highly vulnerable biological traits based on their habitat
specificity, limited environmental tolerance, dependence on specific environmental
activators, dependence on inter-specific interactions or restricted ability to disperse
to or colonize a new range (Foden et al. 2008). Many models have been developed to
estimate this species loss (both local and non-local). It is predicted that due to intermediate climate warming 15–37% of species will suffer extinction by 2050 (Thomas
et al. 2004). Among all the vulnerable species, particularly birds are very sensitive to
climate change. It was found that by 2100 approximately 0.3% of the world’s 8750
land bird species (Jetz et al. 2007) and up to 30% of the Western Hemisphere’s 8400
land bird species could go extinct (Sekercioglu et al. 2008) because of changing
climate. After few studies done on vulnerability of 25 major biodiversity hotspots,
it was predicted that, in long run 56,000 endemic plant species and 3700 endemic
vertebrate species will be lost (Malcolm et al. 2006). Based on the data analysed from
9856 birds, 6222 amphibians and 799 coral reefs, IUCN has estimated that about
35% of the world’s birds, 52% of amphibians and 71% of warm-water reef-building
corals are going to face negative effect of climate change (Foden et al. 2008). A
detailed study was conducted on Amazon basin, central Indo-west Pacific (Coral
Triangle) for birds, amphibians and corals (16,857 species) and depicted that 608–
851 bird species (6–9%), 670–933 amphibian (11–15%), and 47–73 coral species
(6–9%) were vulnerable due to climate change and already threatened with extinction on the IUCN Red List (Foden et al. 2013). While projecting the species loss, it
has been found that chances of local extinctions are significantly higher than that of
global extinctions. Global multi-taxon meta-analysis data generated from recorded
ecological responses projected that mean observed extinction risk (by 2100) is much
higher than the mean predicted extinction risk; e.g. 12.6% in plants (vs. 4% predicted), 9.4% in invertebrates (vs. 7.2% predicted) and 17.7% in vertebrates (vs.
12.4% predicted). Overall, these systematic biodiversity losses are really alarming
for our planet’s health (Maclean and Wilson 2011). It is important to mention here
that only climate change is not the reason for species loss but other natural processes (e.g. changes in land use and cover, introduction of invasive species, species
interactions within ecological networks etc.) are also contributing to this.
Conservation is also facing some unexpected challenges due to global temperature
alteration. It was found that in warmer conditions, painted turtle (Chrysemys picta)
eggs raised to produce female offspring, whereas under cooler conditions males were
predominant (Janzen 1994). This evidence showed that painted turtles are going to
suffer local extinctions in the near future. Climate warming also pose significant
effects on the population and reproductive biology of different organisms. Due to
warmer winter in southern Norway, population dynamics of dippers (Cinclus cinclus)
had changed and increase in population size was noticed (Saether et al. 2000). In
Germany, Pied Flycatchers (Ficedula hypoleuca) and Reed Warblers (Acrocephalus
scirpaceus) showed positive effect in their reproduction which was supposed to be
associated with climate warming of 1.38 °C in spring time (Winkel and Hudde 1997;