4.3 Article

Impact of climate change on direct and indirect species interactions

期刊

MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES
卷 571, 期 -, 页码 1-11

出版社

INTER-RESEARCH
DOI: 10.3354/meps12148

关键词

Climate change; Ocean acidification; Global warming; Species interactions; Predation

资金

  1. David and Lucile Packard Foundation
  2. NSF Award [1416877]
  3. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
  4. Directorate For Geosciences
  5. Division Of Ocean Sciences [1416877, 1416934] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent marine climate change re search has largely focused on the response of individual species to environmental changes in cluding warming and acidification. The response of communities, driven by the direct effects of ocean change on individual species as well the cascade of indirect effects, has received far less study. We used several rocky intertidal species including crabs, whelks, juvenile abalone, and mussels to determine how feeding, growth, and interactions between species could be shifted by changing ocean conditions. Our 10 wk experiment revealed many complex outcomes which highlight the unpredictability of community-level responses. Contrary to our predictions, the largest impact of elevated CO2 was reduced crab feeding and survival, with a pH drop of 0.3 units. Surprisingly, whelks showed no response to higher temperatures or CO2 levels, while abalone shells grew 40 % less under high CO2 conditions. Massive non-consumptive effects of crabs on whelks showed how important indirect effects can be in deter mining climate change responses. Predictions of species outcomes that account solely for physiological responses to climate change do not consider the potentially large role of indirect effects due to species interactions. For strongly linked species (e.g. predator-prey or competitor relationships), the indirect effects of climate change are much less known than direct effects, but may be far more powerful in reshaping future marine communities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据