Search for: All records

Synopsis The fitness implications of climate variability and change are often estimated by integrating an organism’s thermal sensitivity of performance across a time series of experienced body temperatures. Although this approach is an important first step in evaluating an organism’s sensitivity to climate or climate change, it ignores potential influences of recent exposure to thermal stress on current thermal sensitivity. Here, we account for recent thermal stress by estimating rates of damage, repair, and other carryover effects; and we illustrate the approach with fecundity and development rate data from experiments that exposed aphids to various stressful and fluctuating temperatures. Our analyses indicate that heat stress for these aphids starts near the upper thermal limit for performance; that heat stress intensifies with both the exposure duration and with temperature; and that there is considerable capacity for repair at temperatures near the thermal optimum for performance. Results from experiments with aphids indicate that incorporating time series of damage, recovery, and repair will be necessary to anticipate fitness outcomes of climate change and variability. 

Climate warming can induce a cost-of-living “squeeze” in ectotherms by increasing energetic expenditures while reducing foraging gains. We used biophysical models (validated by 2685 field observations) to test this hypothesis for 10 ecologically diverse lizards in African and Australian deserts. Historical warming (1950–2020) has been more intense in Africa than in Australia, translating to an energetic squeeze for African diurnal species. Although no net impact on Australian diurnal species was observed, warming generated an energetic “relief” (by increasing foraging time) for nocturnal species. Future warming impacts will be more severe in Africa than in Australia, requiring increased rates of food intake (+10% per hour active for diurnal species). The effects of climate warming on desert lizard energy budgets will thus be species-specific but potentially predictable. 

Abstract Organisms living in seasonal environments often adjust physiological capacities and sensitivities in response to (or in anticipation of) environment shifts. Such physiological and morphological adjustments (“acclimation” and related terms) inspire opportunities to explore the mechanistic bases underlying these adjustments, to detect cues inducing adjustments, and to elucidate their ecological and evolutionary consequences. Seasonal adjustments (“seasonal acclimation”) can be detected either by measuring physiological capacities and sensitivities of organisms retrieved directly from nature (or outdoor enclosures) in different seasons or less directly by rearing and measuring organisms maintained in the laboratory under conditions that attempt to mimic or track natural ones. But mimicking natural conditions in the laboratory is challenging – doing so requires prior natural-history knowledge of ecologically relevant body temperature cycles, photoperiods, food rations, social environments, among other variables. We argue that traditional laboratory-based conditions usually fail to approximate natural seasonal conditions (temperature, photoperiod, food, ‘lockdown’). Consequently, whether the resulting acclimation shifts correctly approximate those in nature is uncertain, and sometimes is dubious. We argue that background natural history information provides opportunities to design acclimation protocols that are not only more ecologically relevant, but also serve as templates for testing the validity of traditional protocols. Finally, we suggest several best practices to help enhance ecological realism. 

Abstract Parents often weigh social, familial and cultural considerations when choosing their baby's name, but the name they choose could potentially be influenced by their physical or biotic environments. Here we examine whether the popularity of month and season names of girls covary geographically with environmental variables. In the continental USA, April, May and June (Autumn, Summer) are the most common month (season) names: April predominates in southern states (early springs), whereas June predominates in northern states (later springs). Whether April's popularity has increased with recent climate warming is ambiguous. Autumn is most popular in northern states, where autumn foliage is notably colourful, and in eastern states having high coverage of deciduous foliage. On a continental scale, Autumn was most popular in English-speaking countries with intense colouration of autumn foliage. These analyses are descriptive but indicate that climate and vegetation sometimes influence parental choice of their baby's name.