New Research on Biodiversity and Nature

A round-up of recent work published in scientific journals

Mapping useful plants. Cooking rhinos. Bias against introduced species. An ocean amplifier effect. Hooves harm wetlands. Settler ecologies.

The global distribution of plants used by humans: This study looked at where more than 35,000 species of useful plants are distributed worldwide. It considered plants in ten use categories — such as foods, medicines, materials and so on. There was a general overlap between the distribution of these plants and total plant diversity, suggesting that conservation of biodiversity can also conserve benefits to people. However, the authors say that presence of protected areas is negatively correlated with the number of useful plant species. They say this highlights the need to protect areas with high concentrations of useful plants — such as Indigenous lands across Mesoamerica, the Horn of Africa, and Southern Asia where such plants are disproportionately found. Read the full paper in Science.

Rising heat threatens to bake African rhinos: Rhinoceroses don’t sweat. Instead, they bathe or seek shade to keep cool. This puts them at risk if their habitats become warmer and drier. This study used standard scenarios for future greenhouse gas emissions to predict changes in temperature and precipitation in national parks in South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Botswana, Tanzania and eSwatini. The researchers then assessed the effect those changes would have on both black and white rhinoceroses over the next 30-60 years. They concluded that climate change will significantly reduce the probability of both species remaining, with temperature being a more important factor than precipitation. They predict that Namibia’s Etosha National Park and Hlane National Park in eSwatini will both become too hot for rhinos even in the more moderate emissions scenario. Read the press release or find the full paper in Biodiversity.

Systematic bias against introduced species: Is conservation science biased against introduced species, as some people contend? The authors of this study reviewed 300 randomly selected academic papers that described the ecological effects of introduced species. They found that two thirds of these papers framed such species negatively. This was true regardless of known harms caused by these species, as well as other factors such as the type of species, the academic journal’s focus and prestige, year of publication, and so on. The authors say that bias means introduced species are persistently regarded as harmful, raising doubts about claims made about them. Find the full paper in BioScience:

Global heating’s impact on plankton has an outsized impact on fish: Computer simulations predict oceanic warming will cause a decline in microscopic plants and other phytoplankton in low and mid latitudes — as has been observed in the North Atlantic over the past 50 years. But it is unclear what this means for species higher up the food web, such as commercially exploited fish. This study used field data to show that small declines in plankton linked to global heating will lead to much bigger drops in fish stocks: A 16-26 percent drop in phytoplankton level would cause the supportable biomass of fish to fall by 38-55 percent. It suggests that global heating is reducing the supply of nutrients from deeper waters, which in turn is reducing the size of phytoplankton and limiting the transfer of energy throughout the food web. Read the press release or the full paper in Nature Communications.

Impacts of hoofed mammals on wetland carbon and biodiversity: Wetlands are important for biodiversity and for mitigating climate change by storing carbon. But they are declining in area and condition worldwide. One reason for this is the impact of introduced ungulates — hoofed mammals such as cattle, pigs, horses and deer. The authors of this paper reviewed nearly 400 studies and other data sources from 35 countries to assess what effects these animals are having. The impacts varied among climate and locations. More studies reported that ungulates were damaging soil, dispersing weeds, decreasing vegetation or suppressing growth of woody plants than reported neutral or positive changes in these areas. Decreases in native biodiversity were reported more often than increases, and 24 of the 33 studies that looked at carbon showed increased emissions due to soil erosion and loss of vegetation. The authors say that excluding ungulates from wetlands could enhance carbon stocks and biodiversity. Read the full paper in Biological Conservation.

Settler ecologies and the future of biodiversity: This paper, using a county of Kenya called Laikipia as a case study, says ecological transformation has entrenched settler colonialism in five ways. These five modes are: eliminating undesirable species; rewilding with desirable species; selectively re-peopling nature; rescuing threatened species; and scaling-up protected areas. The authors say these processes enable ecological relations that benefit settler colonialism to persist, while other ecological relations are suppressed or erased. As countries progress with their implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework, the authors say it is important to question what types of nature will be saved and whose interests this will serve. Read the full paper in Conservation and Society.

In case you missed it, earlier this week I published Nature Beat #12 — full of news, resources, jobs, great stories, and more.

Nature Beat #12

---

Thanks for reading. For past editions, see the Archive. If you found it useful, please consider supporting my work with a free or paid (under £1 a week) subscription. If you want to get in contact, you can reach me at: thenaturebeat@substack.com.