skip to content

Department of Zoology

 

First animals developed complex ecosystems before the Cambrian explosion

News from this site - Mon, 16/05/2022 - 09:16

First animals developed complex ecosystems before the Cambrian explosion Metacommunity analysis suggests succession, not mass extinction, explains Ediacaran diversity drop Early animals formed complex ecological communities more than 550 million years ago, setting the evolutionary stage for the Cambrian explosion...

Categories: Latest News

Satellite images reveal dramatic loss of global wetlands over past two decades

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Fri, 13/05/2022 - 09:06

Global change and human actions are driving rapid changes to tidal wetlands - tidal marshes, mangroves and tidal flats - worldwide. However, ecosystem restoration and natural processes are playing a part in reducing total losses.

But efforts to estimate their current and future status at the global scale remain highly unclear due to uncertainty about how tidal wetlands respond to drivers of change.

In a new study, researchers have developed a machine-learning analysis of vast archives of historical satellite images to detect the extent, timing and type of change across the world’s tidal wetlands between 1999 and 2019.

They found that globally, 13,700 square kilometres of tidal wetlands were lost, offset by gains of 9,700 square kilometres, leading to a net loss of 4,000 square kilometres over the two-decade period.

The study is published today in the journal Science.

“We found 27 per cent of losses and gains were associated with direct human activities, such as conversion to agriculture and restoration of lost wetlands,” said Dr Nicholas Murray, Senior Lecturer and head of James Cook University’s Global Ecology Lab, who led the study.

All other changes were attributed to indirect drivers such as human impacts to river catchments, extensive development in the coastal zone, coastal subsidence, natural coastal processes and climate change.

About three-quarters of the net global tidal wetland decrease happened in Asia, with almost 70 per cent of that total concentrated in Indonesia, China and Myanmar.

“Asia is the global centre of tidal wetland loss from direct human activities. These activities had a lesser role in the losses of tidal wetlands in Europe, Africa, the Americas and Oceania, where coastal wetland dynamics were driven by indirect factors such as wetland migration, coastal modifications and catchment change,” said Murray.

The scientists found that almost three-quarters of tidal wetland loss globally has been offset by the establishment of new tidal wetlands in areas where they formerly did not occur – with notable expansion in the Ganges and Amazon deltas.

Most new areas of tidal wetlands were the result of indirect drivers, highlighting the prominent role that broad-scale coastal processes have in maintaining tidal wetland extent and facilitating natural regeneration.

“This result indicates that we need to allow for the movement and migration of coastal wetlands to account for rapid global change,” said Murray.

He added: “Global-scale monitoring is now essential if we are going to manage changes in coastal environments effectively.”

Over one billion people now live in low-elevation coastal areas globally.

Tidal wetlands are of immense importance to humanity, providing benefits such as carbon storage and sequestration, coastal protection, and fisheries enhancement.

“Protecting our coastal wetlands is critical to supporting coastal communities and the wider health of the planet. These areas are the last refuge for many plants and animals,” said Dr Thomas Worthington, Senior Research Associate in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology and co-author of the study.

He added: “This data can help identify coastal areas most impacted - and therefore in need of protection, or areas where we can prioritise restoration.”

Reference:

Murray, N.J. et al: ‘High-resolution mapping of losses and gains of Earth’s tidal wetlands.’ Science, May 2022. DOI: 10.1126/science.abm9583

More information: www.globalintertidalchange.org

Adapted from a press release by James Cook University

An analysis of over a million satellite images has revealed that 4,000 square kilometres of tidal wetlands have been lost globally over twenty years.

This data can help identify coastal areas most impacted - and therefore in need of protectionThomas WorthingtonNicholas MurrayExtensive coastal development along the East Asia coastline has led to rapid declines of tidal flat ecosystems, which are the principal coastal ecosystems protecting coastal populations in China


The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

YesLicense type: Attribution
Categories: Latest News

Discovered: 150-year-old platypus and echidna specimens that proved some mammals lay eggs

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Thu, 12/05/2022 - 08:57

The specimens, collected in the late 1800s by the scientist William Caldwell, were found in the stores of Cambridge’s University Museum of Zoology.

Categories: Latest News

Cambridge’s global reputation in Biological Sciences recognised in REF 2021

News from this site - Wed, 11/05/2022 - 09:29

Cambridge’s global reputation in Biological Sciences recognised in REF 2021 The results from the latest Research Excellence Framework (REF) have highlighted the global impact of Cambridge’s research in the field of Biological Sciences. 96% of Cambridge’s overall submissions within the Biological Sciences Unit of Assessment...

Categories: Latest News

Protected areas saw dramatic spikes in fires during COVID lockdowns, study finds

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Thu, 05/05/2022 - 16:01

The number of fires inside protected conservation areas across the island of Madagascar shot up dramatically when COVID-19 lockdowns led to the suspension of any on-site management for five months during 2020.

The findings suggest that governments should consider keeping some staff in protected areas at all times as an “essential service”, even during periods of health crisis and travel restriction, argue the scientists behind the study.

They say that more attention must be paid to the management of protected areas, not just expanding their coverage, at the long-delayed convention to set international biodiversity goals later this year. 

Madagascar is a renowned biodiversity “hotspot”, home to species such as its famous lemur populations that don’t exist anywhere else. The island is also a frontline in the fight between wildlife protection and habitat loss.   

The study, published today in Nature Sustainability, is the first to gauge the effects of the pandemic on protected conservation areas. 

An international team of scientists led by Cambridge and Helsinki universities used historical and contemporary fire and weather data to predict rates of burning in Madagascar’s protected areas for every month during 2012-2020.

They compared this data modelling to counts of actual blazes collected by satellites to detect periods when fires raged far beyond what might be expected from the climate and previous patterns of burning.

When the first lockdowns of 2020 halted the on-site management of protected areas, the numbers of fires – much of it in threatened forest habitat – soared by 209% in March, 223% in April, 78% in May, 248% in June and 76% in July.

However, burning quickly returned to normal levels as predicted by the modelling once management operations resumed – despite continued border closures and economic hardships as a result of the ongoing pandemic.

Researchers describe this scale of burning inside protected areas as “unprecedented” in recent Malagasy history. The only comparable periods were during two spells of civil unrest in 2013 and 2018 in the run-up to elections, but even then the fieriest month was just a 134% increase in burning.

“The disruption caused by COVID-19 clearly demonstrates the dramatic impact that interruptions to the management of protected areas can have on habitats,” said senior author Prof Andrew Balmford from the University of Cambridge.

“Over the last twenty years, excess fires in Malagasy protected areas have been limited to occasional blocks of one or two months.

“When all staff were pulled out of protected areas in March 2020 the fires spiked dramatically and continued at a ferocious level for an unprecedented five months, falling away exactly as staff started to return,” he said.      

While the team says they cannot know for sure what caused all the fires during the early months of COVID-19, lead author Dr Johanna Eklund from the University of Helsinki said that local communities already struggling economically would have come under further pressure from lockdowns.

“Madagascar has very high rates of poverty, and has a history of conflict between the livelihoods of vulnerable people and saving unique biodiversity,” said Eklund, currently a visiting researcher at Cambridge.

“The pandemic increased economic insecurity for many, so it would not be surprising if this led some to encroach on protected lands while on-site management activities were on hold.”

Eklund suggests that a lack of on-site patrolling to prevent any fires from spreading combined with communities resorting to “swidden” – or slash-and-burn – agriculture may be behind much of the spike in lockdown fires. These techniques clear vegetation for crops and cattle-grazing but are illegal inside protected areas.

“Importantly, the study did not measure fires outside conservation sites, so we cannot measure how much protected areas actually mitigated burning compared to areas without protection,” Eklund said.

The team used imaging data from NASA satellite systems capable of detecting “thermal anomalies” and noted for near real-time fire management alerts.

Eklund, who has conducted research in Madagascar for close to a decade, realised she could still remotely assist those protecting the forests. “Satellites pick up fires really well and show where protected areas are under pressure.”

Co-author Domoina Rakotobe, former coordinator for the Malagasy organisation Forum Lafa, the network of terrestrial protected area managers, added: “The high levels of burning during the lockdowns clearly shows the value of on-the-ground management, with protected area teams working with communities to support local livelihoods and safeguard natural resources.”

Scientists suggest that some staffing of protected areas should be considered “essential services” in future crises. 

When all staff were pulled out of protected areas in March 2020 the fires spiked dramaticallyAndrew BalmfordWikimedia commonsSlash and burn practise leading to fires in the region west of Manantenina, Madagascar


The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes
Categories: Latest News

Trojan Horses for water courses

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Thu, 05/05/2022 - 08:00

How do you deal with a harmful invasive species wreaking havoc on the UK’s water pipes? You take advantage of them being fussy eaters and send them a Trojan Horse.

Categories: Latest News

Six new species of tiny frog discovered in Mexico

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Wed, 27/04/2022 - 09:19

The size of a thumbnail, they don't have a tadpole stage and live in a 'secret world' on the forest floor

Categories: Latest News

Scientists crack egg forging evolutionary puzzle

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Tue, 12/04/2022 - 07:00

A genetic study of Zambian cuckoo finches has solved one of nature’s biggest criminal cases, an egg forgery scandal two million years in the making. Its findings suggest that the victims of this fraud may now be gaining the upper hand.

Categories: Latest News

Lack of transparency over cost of conservation projects hampers ability to prioritise funds for nature protection

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Wed, 23/03/2022 - 13:00

A review of 1,987 published reports of conservation interventions has found that only 8.8% reported the total cost of the intervention, and many of these were not detailed or standardised. The authors say this makes it very difficult to determine the cost-effectiveness of different interventions, and to make decisions on how to spend limited funding for biodiversity conservation.

The review, by researchers in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology, is published today in the journal BioScience. This is the first time that cost reporting across a broad range of wildlife conservation interventions has been reviewed.

“If we’re serious about addressing biodiversity loss, knowing the financial costs of interventions is as important as knowing their effectiveness. But the cost of projects is rarely reported for others to benefit from,” said Thomas White, a researcher in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology and first author of the paper.

Dr Silviu Petrovan, in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology and a co-author of the study, added: “Wildlife conservation across the world is severely limited by funding, and the lack of information on the cost-effectiveness of different interventions makes it very difficult to prioritise where this money is spent.”

The work is part of the University of Cambridge’s Conservation Evidence project, led by Professor Bill Sutherland, which has compiled a huge resource of scientific information on the effectiveness of different conservation interventions. It is designed to support anyone making decisions about how to maintain and restore biodiversity.

For this new review, the team checked 1,987 studies in peer-reviewed journals and other reports - representing actions to conserve a range of different species and habitats - to see whether financial costs had been reported. Only 13.3% of these reported any financial costs at all.

“Even when costs are reported, the lack of consistency between reports makes it difficult for others to work out whether a cost is relevant to their project or not,” said Professor Bill Sutherland in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology, a co-author of the study.

He added: “It’s frustrating because the people who implemented conservation projects probably do know how much they cost, it’s just that the information isn’t making its way into the scientific literature so others can benefit from it.”

The review found that costs were reported more often for some specific types of intervention, such as those linked with agriculture – which the authors suggest could be due to the nature of farming as an income-driven activity. Planting hedgerows or wildflower strips on farmland to encourage wildlife, or applying herbicide to control invasive plants, for example, incur costs that farmers must factor into their operations and are easily measurable.

In addition, costs were reported more often for conservation projects in Africa than in other parts of the world. The authors suggest this could be because projects in African countries are more likely to be led by conservation organisations that must prioritise cost-effectiveness.

The authors recommend that researchers, publishers and practitioners report the costs of conservation interventions in standardised formats, so that they can be used to improve decision-making by everyone planning a conservation project. They are now developing a framework to make it easier to report these costs.

“There are some easy steps to be taken to fix this - it’s just about creating a culture of reporting costs as part of reporting a conservation project, and making sure those costs are in a format that allows others to understand how much it would cost them to implement a similar action in a different context,” said White.

The authors say that in healthcare settings there is also a need to efficiently allocate resources - but unlike in conservation, healthcare decision-makers have access to a developed body of work that collates and analyses information on effects and costs. The effectiveness of conservation interventions can be more difficult to evaluate because many factors may be involved - such as acceptability to local communities, or feasibility with the skills and equipment available - as well as cost.

At COP26 in Glasgow last year, world leaders recognised the connection between the global biodiversity crisis and the climate crisis – and the critical role that nature plays in both adapting to and mitigating climate change.

“We’re losing global biodiversity at an alarming rate - it’s a real risk to society, and we need to be serious about reversing that trend. To do it will require unprecedented conservation action at a scale we aren’t yet achieving and we don’t have the finances for. So we need to be really careful about selecting the most cost-effective interventions with the money we’ve got,” said White.

This research was conducted as part of a PhD, funded by the Balfour Studentship at the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology.

Reference

White, T.B. et al: ‘What is the price of conservation; a review of the status quo and recommendations for improving cost reporting.’ BioScience, March 2022. DOI: 10.10.93/biosci/biac007

A new study has found that costs of conservation projects are rarely reported, making it difficult for others to make decisions on the most cost-effective interventions at a time when funding for biodiversity conservation is severely limited.

If we’re serious about addressing biodiversity loss, knowing the financial costs of interventions is as important as knowing their effectivenessThomas WhiteFrog


The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes
Categories: Latest News

Forest restoration must navigate trade-offs between environmental and wood production goals

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Thu, 17/03/2022 - 18:00

Diverse native forests store more above-ground carbon, provide more water to nearby streams, and better support biodiversity and prevent soil erosion than simple tree plantations, a major new study published today in Science has found – but plantations have an advantage in wood production.

The study looked at the relative benefits of restoring native forests versus establishing a range of simple tree plantations in terms of biodiversity conservation and four key functions of value to humans - or ‘ecosystem services’ - provided by a forest: carbon storage, soil erosion control, water provisioning, and wood production.

Forest restoration is gathering pace worldwide, in part as a way to tackle climate change: deforestation is a major source of carbon emissions, and forest restoration can be a ‘nature-based climate solution’ to counter global warming. In many cases, forest restoration is also conducted for the water provisioning and flood regulation functions of forests, and as a means to prevent soil erosion and produce wood products.

“Establishing a tree plantation is useful for producing wood – but not so good for restoring biodiversity. This is a huge missed opportunity for conservation,” said Dr Fangyuan Hua, a researcher previously based in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology, and first author of the paper. Hua now works at Peking University’s Institute of Ecology in China.

She added: “When the goal of a forest restoration scheme includes wood production, then there’s a trade-off to be made between environmental and production outcomes.”

Forest restoration schemes aimed at providing ecosystem services tend to involve tree plantations of just one or a small number of tree species, rather than the restoration of diverse native forests, based on an implicit assumption that tree plantations are just as effective in delivering these services. But the authors say there is no robust scientific evidence for this.

The current synthesis involved an international, cross-disciplinary team of researchers from seven countries, and it is based on an unprecedentedly large database consisting of almost 26,000 records from 264 studies conducted in 53 countries.

“This is the first time that the relative performance of different forest restoration approaches in delivering forests’ most salient services has been assessed simultaneously. We can now begin to understand the synergies and trade-offs across different restoration goals, and so help inform decision-making,” said Professor Andrew Balmford in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology, senior author of the paper.

The study found that as with biodiversity, all three environment-oriented ecosystem services – aboveground carbon storage, soil erosion control, and water provisioning – are delivered better by native forests than by tree plantations. Soil erosion control in particular has the most to lose from plantation-style forest restoration, and the shortfall of plantations in water provisioning is more serious in drier climates – precisely where water is scarcer.

“When restoration goals are about environmental benefits, even if not specifically for the sake of biodiversity conservation, we should aim to restore native forests – and biodiversity will gain as a co-benefit,” said Hua.

However, for wood production, the limited evidence available showed that tree plantations can outperform native forests, highlighting a critical trade-off.

Tree plantations worldwide typically use fast-growing species like pines, firs, and Eucalyptus. These trees tend to grow tall and straight, and in actively managed plantations their growth is often enhanced by fertilisers and weeding to prevent other plants competing for nutrition and light.

In contrast, native forests contain a mix of different tree, shrub, and herbaceous species, and they tend not to be managed for growth. This provides a more suitable habitat with diverse food and other resources for a range of plants and animals to thrive, but also means that wood production may be less efficient.

“The trade-off between the environmental and production benefits a forest can provide has not been discussed much before. Restoration probably cannot meet all goals at once,” said Professor David Edwards at the University of Sheffield’s School of Biosciences and another senior author of the study.

In addition to a need to weigh competing goals, this finding also means that plantations might indirectly provide environmental benefits, by allowing other, higher-biodiversity forests to be ‘spared’ from being cut down for wood production.

“Plantations need to be integrated into a coherent land-use plan, so that their better performance at producing wood gets translated into improved conservation of environmentally valuable forests elsewhere,” Balmford added.

The study also found that for many old or abandoned plantations across the world that seem no longer used for wood production, their environmental performance falls short of native forests. Given that these plantations seem to be common, there are probably significant environmental benefits to be gained from restoring them to native forests.

The United Nations (UN) have declared 2021-2030 the ‘UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration’. Along with many other climate-related initiatives, this promotes the scaling-up of restoration efforts on a global scale to breathe new life into our degraded ecosystems, including the restoration of forests on millions of hectares of deforested and degraded land across the world. Such restoration efforts have the potential to generate immense environmental and social benefits – but only if they are guided by a robust understanding of their consequences for environmental and other outcomes.

This research was funded by the Newton Fund of the Royal Society (UK) and the São Paulo Research Foundation (Brazil).

Reference

Hua, F. et al: ‘The biodiversity and ecosystem service contributions and trade-offs of forest restoration approaches.’ Science, March 2022. DOI: 10.1126/science.abl4649

Co-authors of this study are based at 11 institutions in seven countries: University of Cambridge, Peking University, King’s College London, Yunnan University, University of São Paulo, Universidad de La Frontera, the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, University of New South Wales, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, University of Aberdeen, and University of Sheffield.

Forest restoration schemes should prioritise restoring native forests for greatest climate and environmental benefits, but these benefits incur a trade-off with wood production in comparison with tree plantations.

When restoration goals are about environmental benefits, even if not specifically for the sake of biodiversity conservation, we should aim to restore native forests – and biodiversity will gain as a co-benefitFangyuan Huatibor13, iStock/Getty ImagesPlanting a young tree


The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

YesLicense type: Attribution
Categories: Latest News

Birds of prey populations across Europe are suppressed by lead poisoning from gun ammunition

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Wed, 16/03/2022 - 12:48

New study uses data on lead levels in the livers of thousands of dead raptors to calculate the impact of lead poisoning on population size. 

Categories: Latest News

Pilkington Prize for Teaching awarded to Tim Weil

News from this site - Tue, 15/03/2022 - 13:11

Congratulations to Tim Weil on the award of the Pilkington Prize for Teaching This prize recognises outstanding contributions to teaching and learning at Cambridge. Tim deserves to receive this award for his exceptional and sustained contribution to teaching. Tim is a natural communicator and has brought his unique blend...

Categories: Latest News

Relocating farmland could turn back clock twenty years on carbon emissions

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Thu, 10/03/2022 - 10:00

The reimagined world map of agriculture includes large new farming areas for many major crops around the cornbelt in the mid-western USA, and below the Sahara desert. Huge areas of farmland in Europe and India would be restored to natural habitat.

The redesign - assuming high-input, mechanised farming - would cut the carbon impact of global croplands by 71%, by allowing land to revert to its natural, forested state. This is the equivalent of capturing 20 years’ worth of our current net CO2 emissions. Trees capture carbon as they grow, and also enable more carbon to be captured by the soil than when crops are grown in it.

In this optimised scenario, the impact of crop production on the world’s biodiversity would be reduced by 87%. This would drastically reduce the extinction risk for many species, for which agriculture is a major threat. The researchers say that croplands would quickly revert back to their natural state, often recovering their original carbon stocks and biodiversity within a few decades.

The redesign would eliminate the need for irrigation altogether, by growing crops in places where rainfall provides all the water they need to grow. Agriculture is currently responsible for around 70% of global freshwater use, and this causes drinking water shortages in many drier parts of the world.

The researchers used global maps of the current growing areas of 25 major crops, including wheat, barley and soybean, which together account for over three quarters of croplands worldwide. They developed a mathematical model to look at all possible ways to distribute this cropland across the globe, while maintaining overall production levels for each crop. This allowed them to identify the option with the lowest environmental impact.

The study is published today in the journal Nature Communications Earth & Environment.

“In many places, cropland has replaced natural habitat that contained a lot of carbon and biodiversity – and crops don’t even grow very well there. If we let these places regenerate, and moved production to better suited areas, we would see environmental benefits very quickly,” said Dr Robert Beyer, formerly a researcher in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology, and first author of the study. Beyer is now based at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Germany.

Previous studies have identified priority areas for ecological restoration, but this is the first to plot the relocation of agricultural land to maximise long-term environmental benefits without compromising food security.

While a complete global relocation of cropland is clearly not a scenario that could currently be put into practice, the scientists say their models highlight places were croplands are currently very unproductive, but have potential to be hotspots for biodiversity and carbon storage.

Taking a pared-back approach and only redistributing croplands within national borders, rather than globally, would still result in significant benefits: global carbon impact would be reduced by 59% and biodiversity impact would be 77% lower than at present.

A third, even more realistic option of only relocating the worst-offending 25% of croplands nationally would result in half of the benefits of optimally moving all croplands.

“It’s currently not realistic to implement this whole redesign. But even if we only relocated a fraction of the world’s cropland, focusing on the places that are least efficient for growing crops, the environmental benefits would be tremendous,” said Beyer.

The study finds that the optimal distribution of croplands will change very little until the end of the century, irrespective of the specific ways in which the climate may change.

“Optimal cropping locations are no moving target. Areas where environmental footprints would be low, and crop yields high, for the current climate will largely remain optimal in the future,” said Professor Andrea Manica in the Department of Zoology at the University of Cambridge, senior author of the paper.

The researchers acknowledge that relocating cropland must be done in a way that is acceptable to the people it affects, both economically and socially. They cite examples of set-aside schemes that give farmers financial incentives to retire part of their land for environmental benefit. Financial incentives can also encourage people to farm in better suited locations.

The model generated alternative global distribution maps depending on the way the land is farmed – ranging from advanced, fully mechanised production with high-yielding crop varieties and optimum fertiliser and pesticide application, through to traditional subsistence-based organic farming. Even redistribution of less intensive farming practices to optimal locations would substantially reduce their carbon and biodiversity impacts.

While other studies show that if we moved towards more plant-based diets we could significantly reduce the environmental impacts of agriculture, the researchers say that in reality diets aren’t changing quickly. Their model assumed that diets will not change, and focused on producing the same food as today but in an optimal way.

Many of the world's croplands are located in areas where they have a huge environmental footprint, having replaced carbon-rich and biodiversity-rich ecosystems, and are a significant drain on local water resources. These locations were chosen for historical reasons, such as their proximity to human settlements, but the researchers say it is now time to grow food in a more optimal way.

This research was funded by the European Research Council.

Reference

Beyer, RM et al: ‘Relocating croplands could drastically reduce the environmental impacts of global food production.’ Nature Communications Earth & Environment, March 2022. DOI: 10.1038/s43247-022-00360-6

Scientists have produced a map showing where the world’s major food crops should be grown to maximise yield and minimise environmental impact. This would capture large amounts of carbon, increase biodiversity, and cut agricultural use of freshwater to zero.

If we moved production to better suited areas, we would see environmental benefits very quicklyRobert BeyerWheat fields


The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes
Categories: Latest News

Climate change threat to seabirds must be properly considered for their conservation to be effective

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Wed, 09/03/2022 - 05:01

Seabirds such as kittiwakes and puffins are being put at higher risk because of a disconnect between conservation efforts on the ground, and research knowledge of the threats to these birds from climate change. However, a new study has found that better integration of the two is possible to safeguard biodiversity.

The study, published today in the Journal of Applied Ecology, involved leading conservation experts at the Zoological Society of London (ZSL), the University of Cambridge, BirdLife International, RSPB and the IUCN Climate Change Specialist Group.

It revealed that the climate change threats highlighted by European seabird conservation groups are often poorly understood. In addition, almost one third of possible conservation interventions aimed at reducing the impacts of climate change on seabirds have conflicting or lack of evidence on their effectiveness.

The team has proposed an approach for connecting conservation research and management, which they call a ‘pressure-state-response framework.’ This provides a platform for identifying missing information and areas where connections need to be tightened to improve conservation outcomes.

Co-author Dr Silviu Petrovan - a researcher in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology - said: “Climate change is happening at frightful pace, but our understanding and testing of practical responses for protecting biodiversity are lagging behind. This must change if we are to make substantive improvements - and seabirds are an urgent example.”

Lead author and ZSL Institute of Zoology post-doctoral fellow, Henry Hakkinen said: “There is a real opportunity here to identify missing information, and marry existing research on the risks of climate change with effective conservation and wildlife management.”

"Through our work we have identified several climate change threats and conservation actions that are well understood, but also several threats that are poorly understood and several actions that have very limited or mixed evidence on their effectiveness. These gaps urgently need addressing if we want to work out how we can best help seabirds adapt to climate change and survive.

“Seabirds in Europe are heavily researched and receive quite a lot of conservation attention. They are also heavily impacted by climate change, so are a good species group to start with."

For the study, the team sent a series of surveys to more than 180 seabird conservation practitioners across Western Europe. They identified major knowledge gaps and began tallying up ways in which conservation action could address some of the major threats posed to the species by climate change.

For example, 45% of those surveyed said that disease risk from climate change was a serious threat to seabird populations, but the study showed that more needed to be done to monitor the effectiveness of conservation tools available to practitioners to address this. Hand rearing and vaccinations are suggested tools that could help.

“We need to be pragmatic and evidence-based - but also bold, and explore new approaches including, where appropriate, supporting colonisations of new habitat or even creating new habitats or breeding structures for seabirds. Bridging climate change research and conservation action has never been more important,” said Petrovan.

Seabirds represent one of the most threatened groups of birds in the world, with almost half of all species in decline. They are also significantly directly and indirectly threatened by climate change – for example by heatwaves, extreme wind and rain, and changes in food availability in response to changing climatic conditions, which lead to lack of fish for chicks during the nesting season.

Frameworks that link pressures on the environment, their effect on biodiversity and ways society can respond are often used in global policy-making to translate research to action. The team suggests that their ‘pressure-state-response framework’ could be applied to specific groups of species or ecosystems to identify existing gaps between research and conservation solutions for wildlife most at risk.

ZSL Senior Research Fellow and senior author Dr Nathalie Pettorelli said: “Our study provides an easily transferable approach for identifying missing information, and areas where connections between research and management need to be tightened to improve conservation outcomes.”

This research was funded by Stichting Ave Fenix Europa.

Reference

Hakkinen, H. et al: ‘Linking climate change vulnerability research and evidence on conservation action effectiveness to safeguard seabird populations in Western Europe.’ Journal of Applied Ecology, March 2022. 

Adapted from a press release by the Zoological Society of London.

A new study shows how knowledge of climate change threats could be better connected with conservation efforts to help protect seabirds and other at-risk species.

Bridging climate change research and conservation action has never been more important.Silviu PetrovanSeppo Häkkinen, Third-Eye PhotographyPuffins


The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

YesLicense type: Attribution
Categories: Latest News

Nutritious fish stocks are being squandered by salmon farming, say scientists

Cam ac uk zoology department feed - Tue, 01/03/2022 - 19:00

Scientists studying the Scottish salmon farming industry say that using only fish by-products - such as trimmings - for salmon feed, rather than whole wild-caught fish, would deliver significant nutritional and sustainability gains.

This would allow 3.7 million tonnes of fish to be left in the sea, and enable global annual seafood production to increase by 6.1 million tonnes.

The study, led by a team of scientists from the Universities of Cambridge, Lancaster and Liverpool and environmental NGO Feedback Global is published today in the journal PLOS Sustainability and Transformation

As the world’s fastest growing food sector, aquaculture is often presented as a way to relieve pressure on wild fish stocks. But many aquaculture fish - such as Atlantic salmon - are farmed using fish oil and meal made from millions of tonnes of wild-caught fish, most of which is food-grade and could be eaten directly to provide vital nutrition.

The team collected data on fish nutrient content, fishmeal and fish oil composition, and salmon production, and examined the transfer of micronutrients from feed to fish in Scotland's farmed salmon industry. They found that over half of the essential dietary minerals and fatty acids available in wild fish are lost when these fish are fed to farmed salmon. 

Dr David Willer, a researcher in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Zoology and first author of the paper, said: “Fish and seafood provide a vital and valuable micronutrient-rich food source to people worldwide, and we must make sure we are using this resource efficiently. Eating more wild fish and using alternative feeds in salmon farms can achieve this.”

The team developed various alternative production scenarios where salmon were only produced using fish by-products, and then added more wild-caught fish, mussels or carp for human consumption. All scenarios produced more seafood that was more nutritious than salmon, and left 66-82% of feed fish in the sea. 

Feedback’s Dr Karen Luyckx said: “If we want to feed a growing global population well and sustainably, we must stop catching wild fish to feed farmed fish. Until the salmon industry kicks its wild-caught fish oil and fishmeal habit, chefs and retailers should help citizens switch away from unsustainable salmon by offering ultra-nutritious mussels and small oily fish instead.”

Based on their findings on the Scottish salmon industry, the researchers collected global salmon, fishmeal and oil production data to apply their alternative scenarios at a global scale. One scenario shows that farming more carp and less salmon, using only feed from fish by-products, could leave 3.7 million tonnes of wild fish in the sea while producing 39% more seafood overall. 

The authors caution that not enough is known about the source and species composition of fishmeal, but there are positive signs that the use of plant-based feeds is growing. 

Dr James Robinson of Lancaster University said: “Aquaculture, including salmon farming, has an important role in meeting global food demand, but nutritious wild fish should be prioritised for local consumption rather than salmon feed, particularly if it is caught in food-insecure places. 

“Support for alternative feeds can help this transition, but we still need more data on the volumes and species used for fishmeal and fish oil, as this can show where salmon farming places additional pressure on fish stocks.”

Ultimately, the authors call for a reduction in marine aquaculture feeds, as this will offer opportunities to produce more nutritious seafood while reducing pressure on marine ecosystems. 

Willer added: “If we want to feed the growing global population well and sustainably, we must stop catching wild fish to feed farmed fish. There is an urgent need for the food industry to promote consumption of more sustainable seafood species - like mussels or carp - that don’t require other fish as feed.”

This research was funded by the Cambridge Philosophical Society, via a Henslow Fellowship to David Willer.

Reference
Willer, D.F., et al: ‘Maximising sustainable nutrient production from coupled fisheries-aquaculture systems.’ PLOS Sustainability and Transformation, 2022. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pstr.0000005

Adapted from a press release by Feedback Global.
 

Eating wild-caught fish instead of using it as feed in salmon farming would allow nearly four million tonnes of fish to be left in the sea, while providing an extra six million tonnes of seafood for human consumption, a study finds.

If we want to feed the growing global population well and sustainably, we must stop catching wild fish to feed farmed fish.David WillerFengyou Wan on UnsplashShoal of fish


The text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright ©University of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified.  All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

YesLicense type: Attribution
Categories: Latest News

Utaurora comosa - the first new opabiniid for over 100 years

News from this site - Tue, 08/02/2022 - 09:45

Opabinia, Anomalocaris and other ‘weird wonders’ of the Burgess Shale, remain iconic in popular culture and continue to offer insights into the early evolution of animals. During the 1970-80s Researchers at Cambridge University led transformational work that recognised that these superficially strange animals were actually...

Categories: Latest News