US CLIMATE-CHANGE IMPACTS

494 The added complications of climate

change: understanding and managing
biodiversity and ecosystems
Amanda Staudt1*, Allison K Leidner2, Jennifer Howard3, Kate A Brauman4, Jeffrey S Dukes5, Lara J Hansen6,
Craig Paukert7, John Sabo8, and Luis A Solórzano9

Ecosystems around the world are already threatened by land-use and land-cover change, extraction of natural
resources, biological disturbances, and pollution. These environmental stressors have been the primary source
of ecosystem degradation to date, and climate change is now exacerbating some of their effects. Ecosystems
already under stress are likely to have more rapid and acute reactions to climate change; it is therefore useful
to understand how multiple stresses will interact, especially as the magnitude of climate change increases.
Understanding these interactions could be critically important in the design of climate adaptation strategies,
especially because actions taken by other sectors (eg energy, agriculture, transportation) to address climate
change may create new ecosystem stresses.

Front Ecol Environ 2013; 11(9): 494–501, doi:10.1890/120275

E cosystems and biodiversity have long been threat-

ened by natural and anthropogenic stressors (MA
2005; Mooney et al. 2009). A stressor is an activity or
fragmentation and degradation, urbanization, and infra-
structure development), (2) biological disruptions (intro-
duction of non-native invasive species, diseases, and
phenomenon that induces an adverse effect and therefore pests), (3) extractive activities (such as fishing, forestry,
degrades the condition and viability of a natural system and water withdrawals), and (4) pollution (including
(EPA 2008). The stressors that have most damaged nat- chemicals, heavy metals, and nutrients). The combined
ural systems fall into four general categories: (1) land-use impacts of these stressors are estimated to have altered
and land-cover change ([LULCC], including habitat more than 75% of Earth’s ice-free land (Ellis and
Ramankutty 2008) and virtually all reaches of the world’s
oceans (Halpern et al. 2008).
In a nutshell: Climate change has emerged as a new and increasingly
• Climate change is projected to be an increasingly important important threat to natural systems (Mooney et al. 2009).
source of stress for ecosystems, both directly and through Climate change is a stressor in its own right, and it inter-
complex interactions with other stressors acts with these other stressors in complex ways. Here we
• Ecosystems that are already stressed due to habitat loss,
extraction of natural resources, biological disturbances, and present a conceptual framework of climate interactions
pollution are likely to be affected more quickly and severely with other stressors, survey and categorize current knowl-
by climate change edge about the intersection of climate change and these
• Understanding the complex interactions between climate stressors, highlight potential interactions under future cli-
change and other stressors will be essential in designing effec- mate scenarios, and discuss the implications for develop-
tive strategies for adapting to climate change
• Climate adaptation and mitigation strategies may create new ing effective response strategies.
and sometimes unforeseen stresses on ecosystems, as well as
introducing novel interactions with existing stresses n Conceptual framework
Climate change affects biodiversity and ecosystems
1
National Wildlife Federation, Reston, VA; currently at The National through a variety of pathways; because many ecosystems
Academies, Washington, DC *(astaudt@nas.edu); 2AAAS Science & are already stressed, and because human adaptation and
Technology Policy Fellow/NASA Headquarters, Earth Science Division, mitigation responses to climate change across sectors can
Washington, DC; 3AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow/NOAA, also affect ecosystems, the effects are complex and inter-
Silver Spring, MD; 4Institute on the Environment, University of acting. The combined effects of climate change and other
Minnesota, St Paul, MN; 5Department of Forestry and Natural Resources stressors typically result in increased stress on natural sys-
and Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, tems, although individual stresses can ameliorate each
IN; 6EcoAdapt, Bainbridge Island, WA; 7USGS, Missouri Cooperative other. An activity that is a stressor in one system may
Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at the University of Missouri, Columbia, have a different, neutral, or even positive effect on
MO; 8Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ; 9Gordon and Betty Moore another system. These interactions can affect the timing,
Foundation, Palo Alto, CA distribution, and severity of the stresses experienced by

www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America

A Staudt et al. The added complications of climate change

(a)
ecosystems. In natural systems that are rela- (i) Direct effect of the climatic change
495
tively undisturbed by human activities, climate
change may increase susceptibility to additional Climatic change
Environmental Species, population,
(eg warming,
environmental stresses. Human responses to sea-level rise) (ii) Indirect effect stressor or ecosystem

climate change may further complicate these of the climatic change

relationships, presenting additional and novel (iv) Indirect effect of

Climate mitigation or adaptation
sources of stress. mitigation or action
Figure 1a highlights four pathways illustrating adaptation
action
how a single climatic change and a single stres- (iii) Direct effect of mitigation or adaptation action

sor can affect species, populations, or ecosys-

tems. Figure 1b illustrates these pathways in the
(b)
example of native salmon populations affected (i) In-stream temperatures exceed thermal limits of native salmon
by the climatic stressor of temperature increases
and the existing stressor of non-native salmonid Air and water Non-native
Native salmon
temperature salmonid
encroachment. The pathways are as follows: increases (ii) Warmer water populations populations
favors non-native species

(i) Climate change can directly affect species, (iv) Reduced water volume
Farmers warms more, favors
populations, and ecosystems. In this exam- increase water non-native species
ple, climate-induced increases in stream withdrawals for
irrigation
temperature have a direct, negative impact (iii) Less water available to provide suitable habitat

on native salmon (Battin et al. 2007).

(ii) Climate change can affect a pre-existing Figure 1. (a) General conceptual diagram of the pathways by which a single
stressor and thus have an indirect impact climatic change and another environmental stressor may affect a species,
on the species, populations, and ecosys- population, or ecosystem. A climatic change can (i) have a direct effect as a
tems. For instance, projected increases in stressor in its own right, (ii) interact with another environmental stressor to
water temperatures may also favor non- either increase or decrease the effect of that stressor, (iii) induce a climate
native, more temperature-tolerant trout mitigation or adaptation response that has a direct effect, or (iv) induce a
species (Wenger et al. 2011), thus indi- climate mitigation or adaptation response that interacts with another
rectly increasing competitive pressures on environmental stressor. (b) Application of the conceptual diagram to a
native salmon. specific example for native salmon populations. This example considers the
(iii) Climate mitigation or adaptation actions combined effects and interactions between climate warming and the
may directly affect the ecosystem. For environmental stressor of non-native salmonids.
example, farmers may respond to higher
temperatures by increasing irrigation, thereby tributions (Brook et al. 2008). The existence of an addi-
decreasing streamflow and degrading fish habitat. tional stressor most often exacerbates the impact of a sin-
(iv) Climate mitigation or adaptation actions may indi- gle stressor (ie is synergistic), although there are some
rectly affect the ecosystem. In this case, as increased cases in which a stressor can be antagonistic and will
irrigation depletes in-stream water, the remaining ameliorate the effects of other stressors (Folt et al. 1999).
water will warm more rapidly, further favoring non- Most studies do not specify whether particular interac-
native salmonids. tions are additive, synergistic, or antagonistic.
Climate change can also affect the character of a
Normally there will be multiple climatic changes and separate environmental stressor, specifically by affect-
multiple additional environmental stressors, making it ing the timing, spatial extent, or intensity of the effects
much more challenging to identify and categorize inter- of that stressor. In California’s Central Valley, for
action pathways. Figure 2 illustrates more pathways for instance, increased incidence of drought may affect the
climate and other stressors to affect salmon in California’s timing of water withdrawals for irrigation, causing them
Central Valley. However, even this figure is not inclusive to take place earlier in the season, for a longer duration,
of all the possible interactions; for example, each envi- or with increased frequency (Figure 2; Fischer et al.
ronmental stressor can interact with any of the other 2007). In contrast, warmer stream temperatures are
stressors, and there may be interactions involving multi- facilitating greater encroachment of non-native fishes,
ple stressors. which threatens native frogs in the Sierra Nevada
These pathways can be further organized by recognizing (Knapp et al. 2007); this is an example of an impact on
the different types of interactions among stressors. These the spatial extent of a stressor. If new climate condi-
interactions may be additive, such that the effect of mul- tions benefit an existing pest or invasive species,
tiple stressors equals the sum when each acts alone, or increasing the effects of competition or predation on
they may be nonlinear, so that the combined impacts native species, then this is a case of climate change
have a different effect than the sum of the individual con- affecting the intensity of a stressor.

© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org

 The added complications of climate change A Staudt et al.

496 Higher water have changed (Mantyka-Pringle et al. 2012).

temperature
One empirical study of butterflies in the Sierra
Nevada of California showed that both habitat
loss and climate change had likely contributed
Higher air Longer, hotter to declines in species richness (Forister et al.
temperature growing season
Extraction:
more water
Disturbance:
non-native 2010). The rapid disappearance of the green
withdrawals salmonids
salamander (Aneides aeneus) from the southern
Irrigation: Appalachians of the US has been attributed to
changes in Fertilizer,
amount, pesticide changes in temperature coupled with the sala-
timing increases
Native salmon mander’s limited ability to disperse in land-
scapes modified by logging, resort develop-
Habitat loss: Pollution:
lower flows more runoff ment, and dams (Corser 2001).
More heavy
More
frequent,
Env
ironm s ors rainfall Only a few studies have explicitly projected
C li ental stres events
severe
drought ma
te m ti ons future effects on species and ecosystems caused
itigatio n ac
n or adaptatio by the interactions between LULCC and cli-
mate change. Jetz et al. (2007) projected sub-
Climatic changes stantial range shifts for ~4.5–10% and
~10–20% of 8750 land bird species by 2050
Figure 2. Conceptual diagram of the combined effects of and interactions and 2100, respectively; climate change was
among multiple climatic changes, climate adaptation actions, and other the primary driver of range contractions in
environmental stressors on native salmon in California’s Central Valley. The temperate regions, whereas LULCC was the
colors correspond to those used in Figure 1. primary driver in the tropics. Similarly, the
combined effects of LULCC and climate
n Interactions of climate change with specific change are projected to bring about a loss of 7–24% of
stressors vascular plant diversity relative to 1995 by 2050, with cli-
mate change becoming a more important driver in the
Climate change is already interacting with other envi- second half of this century (Van Vuuren et al. 2006).
ronmental stressors to affect biodiversity and ecosystems. Land surfaces are major reservoirs of carbon (C), so
While the literature on the direct effects of climate LULCC could be a major driver of climate change if asso-
change on species, populations, and ecosystems (pathway ciated activities lead to more greenhouse-gas releases;
[i] in Figure 1a) has grown extensively in recent years (eg alternatively, it could help mitigate future climate change
Grimm et al. 2013; Staudinger et al. 2013), less attention if such activities help store or return C to the land surface
has been devoted to understanding and quantifying the (IPCC 2007). Actions such as clear-cutting or replanting
interactions among climatic changes and other environ- major tracts of forests can also affect local weather pat-
mental stressors (pathway [ii] in Figure 1a). In this sec- terns and the resulting potential capacity for biomass stor-
tion, we summarize the current state of knowledge about age of C (Dale et al. 2011). As such, modifications to land
these interactions, focusing on the four major categories use and land cover intended to address climate mitigation
of environmental stressors identified above: LULCC, or climate adaptation may in turn interact with existing
extraction of natural resources, biological disturbances, stressors or might directly affect species, populations, and
and pollution. Figure 3 illustrates examples of species ecosystems (via pathways [iii] and [iv] in Figure 1a).
affected by the interaction of climate change with each
of these categories of stressor. Extraction of natural resources

Land-use and land-cover change Natural resources can be important ecosystem goods.
However, their extraction can cause severe stress to
Widespread LULCC in the US has affected the amount, species and ecosystems. Climate change can exacerbate
configuration, and quality of habitat and has altered these stresses, particularly if it further reduces the supply
hydrological and climatic regimes (Tilman et al. 2001). of a harvested resource. For example, a sufficient popula-
Habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation are leading tion growth rate in targeted fish species is one factor rele-
causes of terrestrial biodiversity loss, impairment of vant to limiting fishery overexploitation. However,
ecosystem functioning, and associated declines in ecosys- changes to the physical environment, such as water tem-
tem services (IPCC 2007; Krauss et al. 2010). perature, can affect individual growth, survival, and
Climate change is likely to interact with LULCC in reproduction rates, and thereby rates of population
ways that further exacerbate these detrimental effects. replacement (Jonsson and Jonsson 2009). Likewise, water
For example, a recent meta-analysis of empirical studies withdrawals combined with climate change are projected
found that biodiversity was more likely to be negatively to have major effects on freshwater fish; for instance,
affected by habitat loss in areas where precipitation rates Xenopoulos et al. (2005) projected that 25% of rivers

www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America

 A Staudt et al. The added complications of climate change

497

NOAA News Archive 121709

TW Pierson/Flickr

M Van Woert/NOAA NESDIS/ORA

Figure 3. Examples of species for which the interacting effects of climate change and other stressors have been documented. Green
salamanders (Aneides aeneus, upper left) have declined in southern Appalachia due to the combination of warming and habitat
fragmentation. Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua, upper right) in the North Sea, already severely depleted by overfishing, show poorer
recruitment during warmer years. Eastern hemlocks (Tsuga canadensis, bottom left) are experiencing more attacks by the hemlock
woolly adelgid, which is typically kept in check by cold winters. Adélie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae, bottom right) are continuing to
bioaccumulate dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), most likely due to its release by melting glaciers.

could lose more than 22% of fish species by 2070 due to may result in new fishing grounds in arctic regions. In some
the combined effects of increased water withdrawal and cases, forest harvest can result in localized cooling, coun-
climate change. For three out of the four rivers examined teracting climate-induced increases in air temperature
in the US, the combined effects of climate change and (Gibbard et al. 2005). One study found higher levels of but-
water withdrawal were notably greater than the effect of terfly diversity adjacent to irrigated fields, suggesting that
climate change alone (Xenopoulos et al. 2005). irrigation may mitigate the water-limitation effects of cli-
Resource extraction may also make ecosystems more vul- mate change in ecosystems adjacent to agricultural fields
nerable to climate change. The overharvesting of forests, (González-Estébanez et al. 2011).
for example, has the dual effect of causing local environ-
mental damage that can decrease the resilience of an Biological disturbance
ecosystem to climate change and potentially compounding
the magnitude of climate change itself by releasing stored Biological disturbances include invasion by non-native
C into the atmosphere (Hansen and Hoffman 2011). species that have a competitive advantage, allowing them
Furthermore, deforestation can lead to local warming and to spread rapidly; emergence of pest species that have
reductions in rainfall that can exacerbate climate impacts expanded their range or are better able to survive milder
(Lawrence and Chase 2010). Despite the predominantly winters; and disease outbreaks, whether novel, reoccur-
negative interactions between natural resource extraction ring, or introduced. Climate change will likely affect the
and climate change, some interactions could have a posi- severity, timing, and location of biological disturbances,
tive impact or might make new resources available; for as well as limiting the ability of the ecosystem to recover
example, retraction of ice cover and earlier thaw in spring following such an event.

© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org

 The added complications of climate change A Staudt et al.

498 Climate change is expected to exacerbate the impacts ability for a species or induce other habitat changes that
of many introduced plant and animal species. Evidence are less favorable to its spread (Slenning 2010).
suggests that some of these species have already
responded to recent changes in the atmosphere and to Pollution
climate (Walther et al. 2009), and future changes are
likely to increase the ranges of several invasive plant Climate change may magnify the adverse environmental
species across the US (Bradley et al. 2010), potentially effects of pollutants, including metals, pesticides, organic
expanding their impact. In particular, changes in fire material, nutrients, endocrine disruptors, and atmos-
regimes will affect interactions among native and non- pheric ozone (O3; Hansen and Hoffman 2011). It also
native species (Keith et al. 2008). Extreme climatic alters temperature, pH, dilution rates, salinity, and other
events that stress or kill native species are thought to environmental conditions that modify the availability of
temporarily increase communities’ susceptibility to inva- pollutants, the exposure and sensitivity of species to pol-
sion (Diez et al. 2012); these events are projected to lutants, and the transport patterns, uptake, and toxicity
become more frequent with climate change. Although of pollutants (Noyes et al. 2009).
climatic changes may have strong effects on species Climate change is affecting where and when pollutants
ranges in the future, changes in the extent of different are found in the environment. For example, changes in
habitat types within a region have the potential to exert transport patterns, such as currents, wind, and river flows,
as much or more influence over the abundance of some may enable environmental pollutants to accumulate in
invasive plant species (Ibáñez et al. 2009). new places, exposing biota to risk in different habitats.
Climate change is also affecting the geographic ranges Some contaminants thought to be diminishing in concern,
and virulence of many pests, pathogens, parasites, and such as polychlorinated biphenyls, are being remobilized in
disease vectors, and enhancing their ability to spread. For the environment as a result of climate change. Persistent
example, climate-induced habitat change has expanded organic pollutants, deposited in glaciers during the period
the range of fungal pathogens that cause amphibian mor- of heavy use in the mid-20th century, are now being
tality (Pounds et al. 2006). The near-epidemic spread of released due to climate-induced ice melt (Blais et al. 2001).
pine and bark beetles in western US states (Bentz et al. Adélie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae) in western Antarctica,
2010) and the northward expansion of the oyster diseases for example, have continued to bioaccumulate DDT over
“MSX” and “dermo” to Nova Scotia (Ford and Smolowitz the past 30 years, most likely via DDT release from melting
2007) may also be linked to climate. On the basis of an glaciers (Geisz et al. 2008). Altered pH can make heavy
assumption of a 2˚C warming and changes in precipita- metals more biologically available in aquatic systems,
tion, Benning et al. (2002) found that extant Hawaiian thereby increasing their impact on the environment.
honeycreepers may be driven to extinction through the Climate change is also intensifying the effects of some
combined effects of climate change, introduced avian pollutants. Rising temperatures, for instance, can enhance
malaria (spread by introduced mosquitoes), and historical exposure to metals by increasing the respiration rates of fish
land-use changes. As warming continues, hemlock (Ficke et al. 2007). Higher temperatures resulted in greater
woolly adelgids (Adelges tsugae), insect pests that have mortality rates in metal-exposed ectotherms in 80% of the
killed many eastern hemlocks (Tsuga canadensis) in cases examined, largely associated with increased biological
recent years, are likely to expand their ranges northward uptake and accumulation of metals (Sokolova and Lannig
(Dukes et al. 2009). Climate-change impacts on pests may 2008). Higher temperatures can also exacerbate hypoxic
have cascading effects: projected increases in temperature conditions because warmer water holds less dissolved oxy-
could increase the frequency and severity of insect out- gen than cooler water and accelerates the bacterial decay of
breaks, and the resulting increase in tree mortality may in organic matter, which in turn consumes more oxygen
turn promote wildfires. (Rabalais et al. 2009). More frequent extreme rainfall
Forecasting changes in impacts from pests, pathogens, events can further exacerbate hypoxia by increasing the
or invasive plant species is often fraught with uncertain- runoff of nitrogen and phosphorus (P) into waterways.
ties beyond those associated with forecasting climate Finally, climate change may cause increases in some
change alone; often, too little is known about the cli- pollutants, most notably ground-level O3. Many regions
matic tolerances or responses of the species of concern to of the world are projected to have higher O3 concentra-
make confident projections under a given scenario tions by the end of the 21st century (Sitch et al. 2007).
(Dukes et al. 2009). Indeed, climate change may not Few studies have examined the potential consequences of
always increase the net impact of introduced species, and O3 pollution for biodiversity, and predictions are con-
some have argued it could be associated with the decline founded by interactions across trophic levels. However,
of pathogens, vectors, and hosts (Lafferty 2009). In areas reductions in wild plant productivity as a result of O3
that become climatically suitable for a new pest, exposure suggest that climate-induced enhancement of
pathogen, or host, other factors – such as competition, O3 concentrations could affect biodiversity (Wittig et al.
physical barriers, or predation – may still limit its range. 2009). Furthermore, ground-level O3 damage will likely
Furthermore, climate change may reduce climatic suit- offset some productivity gains in plants due to rising

www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America

A Staudt et al. The added complications of climate change

Table 1. Examples of how climate change interacts with other ecosystem stressors and options for modifying con- 499
servation and management strategies to facilitate climate-change adaptation
Stress Climate-change interaction example Climate-change adaptation options
Habitat Many vernal pools in New Jersey coastal areas have To create new corridors for amphibians, New Jersey is
fragmentation been lost due to urbanization and development. identifying areas to create new vernal pools at elevations
and urban Projected sea-level rise would fragment habitat by above the projected sea-level rise and in places adjacent to
development inundating the migratory routes used by eastern tiger existing protected lands (USFWS and NOAA 2012).
salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum) and Cope’s gray
treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis) (USFWS and NOAA 2012).
Fishery The North Sea populations of Atlantic cod (Gadus Fisheries management approaches such as harvest limits
exploitation morhua) have been severely depleted by over- and temporary closures should factor in how short- and
harvesting. Cod species recruitment is weakened long-term climate changes affect recruitment rates.
during warm years; thus, increasing temperature may
compromise a full recovery (Olsen et al. 2011).
Mining Metal and acid pollution can accumulate in nearby To be prepared for more extreme conditions, remediation
topsoil during dry spells and then be washed into efforts need to be designed to accommodate greater
streams during heavy rains, posing a danger to aquatic variability and shifting baseline conditions (Nordstrom
life. Climate change is lengthening dry summers in the 2009).
western US and bringing heavier rainfall, thereby
increasing the risk of polluted runoff (Nordstrom 2009).
Invasive Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) is invasive in arid and semi- Restoration efforts can be targeted in areas that are
species arid shrublands and grasslands of the Intermountain projected to become wetter and therefore less hospitable
West, areas that are expected to become more arid with for cheatgrass (Bradley 2009).
climate change. Cheatgrass also promotes fire, creating
a positive feedback cycle favoring further invasion,
the exclusion of native plants, and loss of carbon (Crowl
et al. 2008).
Disease Disease outbreaks in wildlife and humans caused by Monitoring diseases in locations that are becoming clima-
the bacteria Vibrio spp correspond with increased preci- tically favorable, for example at the northern and upper
pitation and rising ocean temperatures. Vibrio infections elevation limits, can provide insight into where diseases
in the US have increased since 2000, corresponding to are increasing in prevalence, inform efforts to control
the frequency and severity of extremes in temperature other stressors associated with disease spread (eg water
and precipitation (Martinez-Urtaza et al. 2010). pollution), and guide wildlife and public health interventions.
Nutrient Parts of Lake Champlain have elevated P levels and The EPA is now working to update the 2002 P Total
loading and have been experiencing dangerous and unsightly Maximum Daily Load for Lake Champlain to account
eutrophication cyanobacteria blooms in recent summers (Facey for the implications of climate change, such as altered
et al. 2012). Runoff of excess fertilizer from agricul- precipitation patterns and flow in the watershed
tural fields is a major source of P pollution and could (Zamudio 2011).
be exacerbated by climate-change-induced increases
in heavy rainfall events.

atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, thus reducing C stor- Reducing the impact of other stressors and increasing
age on land and possibly contributing further to climate the connectivity of fragmented landscapes are already
change (Sitch et al. 2007). important components of most climate-change adapta-
tion strategies (Stein et al. 2013). However, existing con-
n Implications for conservation, natural resource servation actions to address non-climate stressors may no
management, and research longer be sufficient to achieve desired outcomes (Hansen
and Hoffman 2011), particularly if they do not address
Consideration of the multifaceted context in which bio- interactions among stressors and among potential
diversity and ecosystems are being stressed will be critical response strategies. In many cases, available tools for
for informing and prioritizing conservation strategies and responding to a particular stressor will need to be modi-
natural resource management as climate change pro- fied to incorporate the effects of climate change, as illus-
gresses. A failure to account for interactions may result in trated in Table 1. For example, there have been many
the implementation of climate adaptation strategies that suggestions regarding how to locate, design, and connect
are at best inefficient and at worst harmful. Fortunately, terrestrial reserves to accommodate new climatic condi-
natural resource managers have considerable training and tions (Lawler 2009). Likewise, the regulations or policies
experience in addressing interacting environmental stres- that limit plant and animal harvest rates will probably
sors; this institutional knowledge can be applied to cli- need to be adjusted to reflect changes in distribution and
mate adaptation strategies as well. abundance resulting from changing climates. In other

© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org

 The added complications of climate change A Staudt et al.

500 cases, new management approaches might be required. For the University of Missouri, the USGS, the US Fish and
instance, past practices that typically allowed pine beetle Wildlife Service, and the Wildlife Management Institute.
(Dendroctonus spp) infestations to run their course have
proven ineffective in recent years; the beetle propagated n References
unchecked when the cold-weather conditions that typi- Battin J, Wiley MW, Ruckelshaus MH, et al. 2007. Projected
cally regulate outbreaks failed to occur (Bentz et al. 2010). impacts of climate change on salmon habitat restoration. P
The potential for maladaptive management strategies Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 6720–25.
Benning TL, LaPointe D, Atkinson CT, and Vitousek PM. 2002.
that address one stressor but exacerbate another is an Interactions of climate change with biological invasions and
additional factor in the effective stewardship of biodiver- land use in the Hawaiian Islands: modeling the fate of endemic
sity and ecosystems in the context of climate change. As birds using a geographic information system. P Natl Acad Sci
portrayed in our conceptual framework (Figures 1 and 2), USA 99: 14246–49.
climate adaptation strategies – for the benefit of either Bentz BJ, Regniere J, Fettig CJ, et al. 2010. Climate change and
bark beetles of the western United States and Canada: direct
human or natural systems – can become new stressors and indirect effects. BioScience 60: 602–13.
themselves. Many of the tools used to control pests and Blais JM, Schindler DW, Muir DCG, et al. 2001. Melting glaciers: a
disease outbreaks (eg pesticides), for instance, can have major source of persistent organochlorines to subalpine Bow
other adverse effects that may be compounded by climate Lake in Banff National Park, Canada. Ambio 30: 410–15.
change. Research is still needed to clarify how best to Bradley BA. 2009. Regional analysis of the impacts of climate
change on cheatgrass invasion shows potential risk and oppor-
identify possible unintended consequences and reconcile tunity. Glob Change Biol 15: 196–208.
different objectives. Bradley BA, Blumenthal DM, Wilcove DS, and Ziska LH. 2010.
A better understanding of the interactions between cli- Predicting plant invasions in an era of global change. Trends
mate change and multiple environmental stressors will be Ecol Evol 25: 310–18.
essential for developing management strategies. There is Brook BW, Sodhi N, and Bradshaw CJA. 2008. Synergies among
extinction drivers under global change. Trends Ecol Evol 23:
only a nascent understanding regarding the precise path- 453–60.
ways, types, and character of interactions. Yet, combina- Corser JD. 2001. Decline of disjunct green salamander (Aneides
tions of stressors will shape the ecosystems of the future. aeneus) populations in the southern Appalachians. Biol Conserv
In particular, the presence of multiple interacting stres- 97: 119–26.
sors increases the likelihood of broaching thresholds or Crowl T, Parmenter R, and Crist T. 2008. The spread of invasive
species and infectious disease as drivers and responders of
tipping points that cause a system to rapidly shift to a new
ecosystem change at regional to continental scales. Front Ecol
state. Future research should prioritize the development Environ 6: 238–46.
of analytical frameworks and tools to screen ecosystems Dale VH, Efroymson RA, and Kline KL. 2011. The land use–cli-
for vulnerability, to model and identify critical thresh- mate change–energy nexus. Landscape Ecol 26: 755–73.
olds, and to study interactions among climate and other Diez JM, D’Antonio CM, Dukes JS, et al. 2012. Will extreme cli-
stressors explicitly. matic events facilitate biological invasions? Front Ecol Environ
10: 249–57.
A critical barrier to investigating how multiple stressors Dukes JS, Pontius J, Orwig DA, et al. 2009. Responses of insect
interact is the lack of national networks that combine cli- pests, pathogens, and invasive plant species to climate change
mate, biological, and stressor information, including in the forests of northeastern North America: what can we pre-
explicit data on population structure and abundance for dict? Can J Forest Res 39: 231–48.
invasive, rare, imperiled, and other key species. Such net- Ellis EC and Ramankutty N. 2008. Putting people in the map:
anthropogenic biomes of the world. Front Ecol Environ 6:
works would allow researchers to combine information 439–47.
on projected climate changes with species biological data EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 2008. US EPA’s
to understand possible future range shifts, to consider 2008 Report on the Environment (Final Report). Washington,
how other environmental stressors would influence future DC: US EPA. EPA/600/R-07/045F. NTIS PB2008-112484.
species distributions, and to better attribute different Facey DE, Marsden JE, Mihuc TB, and Howe EA. 2012. Lake
Champlain 2010: a summary of recent research and monitoring
impacts to climate change or other stressors. This more initiatives. J Great Lakes Res 38: 1–5.
detailed understanding will be essential for developing Ficke AD, Myrick CA, and Hansen LJ. 2007. Potential impacts of
effective natural resource management strategies that will global climate change on freshwater fisheries. Rev Fish Biol
mitigate the effects of a changing climate. Fisher 17: 581–613.
Fischer G, Tubiello FN, van Velthuizen H, and Wiberg DA. 2007.
Climate change impacts on irrigation water requirements:
n Acknowledgements effects of mitigation, 1990. Technol Forcast Soc 74: 1083–107.
Folt CL, Chen CY, Moore MV, and Burnaford J. 1999. Synergism
We thank K Johnson, J Riddell, and D Allen for helpful and antagonism among multiple stressors. Limnol Oceanogr 44:
input to earlier versions of this manuscript. We acknowl- 864–77.
edge the US Geological Survey (USGS), the Gordon and Ford SE and Smolowitz R. 2007. Infection dynamics of an oyster
parasite in its newly expanded range. Mar Biol 151: 119–33.
Betty Moore Foundation, and the University of Missouri Forister ML, McCall AC, Sanders NJ, et al. 2010. Compounded
for supporting the workgroup meetings. The Missouri effects of climate change and habitat alteration shift patterns of
Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit is jointly butterfly diversity. P Natl Acad Sci USA 107: 2088–92.
sponsored by the Missouri Department of Conservation, Geisz HN, Dickhut RM, Cochran MA, et al. 2008. Melting glaci-

www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America

A Staudt et al. The added complications of climate change

ers: a probable source of DDT to the Antarctic marine ecosys- cus and Vibrio vulnificus illnesses. Food Res Int 43: 1780–90.
tem. Environ Sci Technol 42: 3958–62. Mooney H, Larigauderie A, Cesario M, et al. 2009. Biodiversity,
501
Gibbard S, Caldeira K, Bala G, et al. 2005. Climate effects of global climate change, and ecosystem services. Curr Opin Environ
land cover change. Geophys Res Lett 32: L23705. Sustain 1: 46–54.
González-Estébanez FJ, García-Tejero S, Mateo-Tomás P, and Olea Nordstrom DK. 2009. Acid rock drainage and climate change. J
PP. 2011. Effects of irrigation and landscape heterogeneity on Geochem Explor 100: 97–104.
butterfly diversity in Mediterranean farmlands. Agri Ecosyst Noyes PD, McElwee MK, Miller HD, et al. 2009. The toxicology of
Environ 144: 262–70. climate change: environmental contaminants in a warming
Grimm NB, Chapin III FS, Bierwagen B, et al. 2013. The impacts world. Environ Intl 35: 971–86.
of climate change on ecosystem structure and function. Front Olsen EM, Ottersen G, Llope M, et al. 2011. Spawning stock and
Ecol Environ 11: 474–82. recruitment in North Sea cod shaped by food and climate. P
Halpern BS, Walbridge S, Selkoe KA, et al. 2008. A global map of Roy Soc B-Biol Sci 278: 504–10.
human impact on marine ecosystems. Science 319: 948–52. Pounds AJ, Bustamante MR, Coloma LA, et al. 2006. Widespread
Hansen LJ and Hoffman JR. 2011. Climate savvy: adapting conser- amphibian extinctions from epidemic disease driven by global
vation and resource management to a changing world. warming. Nature 439: 161–67.
Washington, DC: Island Press. Rabalais NN, Turner RE, Diaz R, and Justić D. 2009. Global
Ibáñez I, Sinlander Jr JA, Wilson AM, et al. 2009. Multivariate change and eutrophication of coastal waters. ICES J Mar Sci
forecasts of potential distributions of invasive plant species. 66: 1528–37.
Ecol Appl 19: 359–75. Sitch S, Cox PM, Collins WJ, and Huntingford C. 2007. Indirect
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. radiative forcing of climate change through ozone effects on
Climate change 2007: synthesis report. Contributions of the land-carbon sink. Nature 448: 791–95.
Working Groups I, II, and III to the Fourth Assessment Report Slenning BD. 2010. Global climate change and implications for
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (AR4). disease emergence. Vet Pathol Online 47: 28–33.
Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC. Sokolova IM and Lannig G. 2008. Interactive effects of metal pol-
Jetz W, Wilcove DS, and Dobson AP. 2007. Projected impacts of lution and temperature on metabolism in aquatic ectotherms:
climate and land-use change on the global diversity of birds. implications of global climate change. Clim Res 37: 181–201.
PLoS Biol 5: e157. Staudinger MD, Carter SL, Cross MS, et al. 2013. Biodiversity in a
Jonsson B and Jonsson N. 2009. A review of the likely effects of cli- changing climate: a synthesis of current and projected trends in
mate change on anadromous Atlantic salmon Salmo salar and the US. Front Ecol Environ 11: 465–73.
brown trout Salmo trutta, with particular reference to water Stein BA, Staudt A, Cross MS, et al. 2013. Preparing for and man-
temperature and flow. J Fish Biol 75: 2381–447. aging change: climate adaptation for biodiversity and ecosys-
Keith DA, Akçakaya HR, Thuiller W, et al. 2008. Predicting tems. Front Ecol Environ 11: 502–10.
extinction risks under climate change: coupling stochastic pop- Tilman D, Fargione J, Wolff B, et al. 2001. Forecasting agricultur-
ulation models with dynamic bioclimatic habitat models. Biol ally driven global environmental change. Science 292: 281–84.
Lett 4: 560–63. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service) and NOAA (National
Knapp RA, Boiano DM, and Vredenburg VT. 2007. Removal of Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2012. National
nonnative fish results in population expansion of a declining fish, wildlife, and plants climate adaptation strategy: public
amphibian (mountain yellow-legged frog, Rana muscosa). Biol review draft. Washington, DC: USFWS and NOAA.
Conserv 135: 11–20. Van Vuuren DP, Sala OE, and Pereira HM. 2006. The future of vascu-
Krauss J, Bommarco R, Guardiola M, et al. 2010. Habitat fragmen- lar plant diversity under four global scenarios. Ecol Soc 11: 25.
tation causes immediate and time-delayed biodiversity loss at www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art25/. Viewed 4 Oct 2013.
different trophic levels. Ecol Lett 13: 597–605. Walther GR, Roques A, Hulme PE, et al. 2009. Alien species in a
Lafferty KD. 2009. The ecology of climate change and infectious warmer world: risks and opportunities. Trends Ecol Evol 24:
diseases. Ecology 90: 888–900. 686–93.
Lawler JJ. 2009. Climate change adaptation strategies for resource Wenger SJ, Isaak DJ, Luce CH, et al. 2011. Flow regime, tempera-
management and conservation planning. Ann NY Acad Sci ture, and biotic interactions drive differential declines of trout
1162: 79–98. species under climate change. P Natl Acad Sci USA 108:
Lawrence PJ and Chase TN. 2010. Investigating the climate 14175–80.
impacts of global land cover change in the community climate Wittig VE, Ainsworth EA, Naidu SL, et al. 2009. Quantifying the
system model. Int J Climatol 30: 2066–87. impact of current and future tropospheric ozone on tree bio-
MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Ecosystems and mass, growth, physiology and biochemistry: a quantitative
human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. Washington, DC: meta-analysis. Glob Change Biol 15: 396–424.
World Resources Institute. Xenopoulos MA, Lodge DM, Alcamo J, et al. 2005. Scenarios of
Mantyka-Pringle CS, Martin TG, and Rhodes JR. 2012. Interactions freshwater fish extinctions from climate change and water
between climate and habitat loss effects on biodiversity: a system- withdrawal. Glob Change Biol 11: 1557–64.
atic review and meta-analysis. Glob Change Biol 18: 1239–52. Zamudio HM. 2011. Predicting the future and acting now: climate
Martinez-Urtaza J, Bowers JC, Trinanesc J, and DePaola A. 2010. change, the Clean Water Act and the Lake Champlain phos-
Climate anomalies and the increasing risk of Vibrio parahaemolyti- phorus TMDL. Vermont Law Review 37: 975–1022.

© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org