• Energy Research
• 13. Climate action close

AbstractClimate change and human activity are dooming species at an unprecedented rate via a plethora of direct and indirect, often synergic, mechanisms. Among these, primary extinctions driven by environmental change could be just the tip of an enormous extinction iceberg. As our understanding of the importance of ecological interactions in shaping ecosystem identity advances, it is becoming clearer how the disappearance of consumers following the depletion of their resources — a process known as ‘co-extinction’ — is more likely the major driver of biodiversity loss. Although the general relevance of co-extinctions is supported by a sound and robust theoretical background, the challenges in obtaining empirical information about ongoing (and past) co-extinction events complicate the assessment of their relative contributions to the rapid decline of species diversity even in well-known systems, let alone at the global scale. By subjecting a large set of virtual Earths to different trajectories of extreme environmental change (global heating and cooling), and by tracking species loss up to the complete annihilation of all life either accounting or not for co-extinction processes, we show how ecological dependencies amplify the direct effects of environmental change on the collapse of planetary diversity by up to ten times.

AbstractEcosystems face both local hazards, such as over-exploitation, and global hazards, such as climate change. Since the impact of local hazards attenuates with distance from humans, local extinction risk should decrease with remoteness, making faraway areas safe havens for biodiversity. However, isolation and reduced anthropogenic disturbance may increase ecological specialization in remote communities, and hence their vulnerability to secondary effects of diversity loss propagating through networks of interacting species. We show this to be true for reef fish communities across the globe. An increase in fish-coral dependency with the distance of coral reefs from human settlements, paired with the far-reaching impacts of global hazards, increases the risk of fish species loss, counteracting the benefits of remoteness. Hotspots of fish risk from fish-coral dependency are distinct from those caused by direct human impacts, increasing the number of risk hotspots by ~30% globally. These findings might apply to other ecosystems on Earth and depict a world where no place, no matter how remote, is safe for biodiversity, calling for a reconsideration of global conservation priorities.

AbstractThe biosphere is changing rapidly due to human endeavour. Because ecological communities underlie networks of interacting species, changes that directly affect some species can have indirect effects on others. Accurate tools to predict these direct and indirect effects are therefore required to guide conservation strategies. However, most extinction‐risk studies only consider the direct effects of global change—such as predicting which species will breach their thermal limits under different warming scenarios—with predictions of trophic cascades and co‐extinction risks remaining mostly speculative. To predict the potential indirect effects of primary extinctions, data describing community interactions and network modelling can estimate how extinctions cascade through communities. While theoretical studies have demonstrated the usefulness of models in predicting how communities react to threats like climate change, few have applied such methods to real‐world communities. This gap partly reflects challenges in constructing trophic network models of real‐world food webs, highlighting the need to develop approaches for quantifying co‐extinction risk more accurately. We propose a framework for constructing ecological network models representing real‐world food webs in terrestrial ecosystems and subjecting these models to co‐extinction scenarios triggered by probable future environmental perturbations. Adopting our framework will improve estimates of how environmental perturbations affect whole ecological communities. Identifying species at risk of co‐extinction (or those that might trigger co‐extinctions) will also guide conservation interventions aiming to reduce the probability of co‐extinction cascades and additional species losses.

Human induced ecosystem alterations and climate change are expected to drive several species to extinction. In this context, the attention of public opinion, and hence conservationists' efforts, are often targeted towards species having emotional, recreational and/or economical value. This tendency may result in a high number of extinctions happening unnoticed. Among these, many could involve parasites. Several studies have highlighted various reasons why we should care about this, that go far beyond the fact that parasites are amazingly diverse. A growing corpus of evidence suggests that parasites contribute much to ecosystems both in terms of biomass and services, and the seemingly paradoxical idea that a healthy ecosystem is one rich in parasites is becoming key to the whole concept of parasite conservation. Although various articles have covered different aspects of host-parasite co-extinctions, I feel that some important conceptual issues still need to be formally addressed. In this review, I will attempt at clarifying some of them, with the aim of providing researchers with a unifying conceptual framework that could help them designing future studies. In doing this, I will try to draw a more clear distinction between the (co-)evolutionary and the ecological dimensions of co-extinction studies, since the ongoing processes that are putting parasites at risk now operate at a scale that is extremely different from the one that has shaped host-parasite networks throughout million years of co-evolution. Moreover, I will emphasize how the complexity of direct and indirect effects of parasites on ecosystems makes it much challenging to identify the mechanisms possibly leading to co-extinction events, and to predict how such events will affect ecosystems in the long run.