• Energy Research

AbstractThe Younger Dryas (YD, 12.9–11.7 ka) is the most recent, near‐global interval of abrupt climate change with rates similar to modern global warming. Understanding the causes and biodiversity effects of YD climate changes requires determining the spatial fingerprints of past temperature changes. Here we build pollen‐based and branched glycerol dialkyl glycerol tetraether‐based temperature reconstructions in eastern North America (ENA) to better understand deglacial temperature evolution. YD cooling was pronounced in the northeastern United States and muted in the north central United States. Florida sites warmed during the YD, while other southeastern sites maintained a relatively stable climate. This fingerprint is consistent with an intensified subtropical high during the YD and demonstrates that interhemispheric responses were more complex spatially in ENA than predicted by the bipolar seesaw model. Reduced‐amplitude or antiphased millennial‐scale temperature variability in the southeastern United States may support regional hotspots of biodiversity and endemism.

AbstractThe Younger Dryas (YD, 12.9–11.7 ka) is the most recent, near‐global interval of abrupt climate change with rates similar to modern global warming. Understanding the causes and biodiversity effects of YD climate changes requires determining the spatial fingerprints of past temperature changes. Here we build pollen‐based and branched glycerol dialkyl glycerol tetraether‐based temperature reconstructions in eastern North America (ENA) to better understand deglacial temperature evolution. YD cooling was pronounced in the northeastern United States and muted in the north central United States. Florida sites warmed during the YD, while other southeastern sites maintained a relatively stable climate. This fingerprint is consistent with an intensified subtropical high during the YD and demonstrates that interhemispheric responses were more complex spatially in ENA than predicted by the bipolar seesaw model. Reduced‐amplitude or antiphased millennial‐scale temperature variability in the southeastern United States may support regional hotspots of biodiversity and endemism.

During the Anthropocene and other eras of rapidly changing climates, rates of change of ecological systems can be described as fast, slow or abrupt. Fast ecological responses closely track climate change, slow responses substantively lag climate forcing, causing disequilibria and reduced fitness, and abrupt responses are characterized by nonlinear, threshold-type responses at rates that are large relative to background variability and forcing. All three kinds of climate-driven ecological dynamics are well documented in contemporary studies, palaeoecology and invasion biology. This fast-slow-abrupt conceptual framework helps unify a bifurcated climate-change literature, which tends to separately consider the ecological risks posed by slow or abrupt ecological dynamics. Given the prospect of ongoing climate change for the next several decades to centuries of the Anthropocene and wide variations in ecological rates of change, the theory and practice of managing ecological systems should shift attention from target states to target rates. A rates-focused framework broadens the strategic menu for managers to include options to both slow and accelerate ecological rates of change, seeks to reduce mismatch among climate and ecological rates of change, and provides a unified conceptual framework for tackling the distinct risks associated with fast, slow and abrupt ecological rates of change.

During the Anthropocene and other eras of rapidly changing climates, rates of change of ecological systems can be described as fast, slow or abrupt. Fast ecological responses closely track climate change, slow responses substantively lag climate forcing, causing disequilibria and reduced fitness, and abrupt responses are characterized by nonlinear, threshold-type responses at rates that are large relative to background variability and forcing. All three kinds of climate-driven ecological dynamics are well documented in contemporary studies, palaeoecology and invasion biology. This fast-slow-abrupt conceptual framework helps unify a bifurcated climate-change literature, which tends to separately consider the ecological risks posed by slow or abrupt ecological dynamics. Given the prospect of ongoing climate change for the next several decades to centuries of the Anthropocene and wide variations in ecological rates of change, the theory and practice of managing ecological systems should shift attention from target states to target rates. A rates-focused framework broadens the strategic menu for managers to include options to both slow and accelerate ecological rates of change, seeks to reduce mismatch among climate and ecological rates of change, and provides a unified conceptual framework for tackling the distinct risks associated with fast, slow and abrupt ecological rates of change.

Understanding the mechanisms of climate that produce novel ecosystems is of joint interest to conservation biologists and palaeoecologists. Here, we define and differentiate transient from accumulated novelty and evaluate four climatic mechanisms proposed to cause species to reshuffle into novel assemblages: high climatic novelty, high spatial rates of change (displacement), high variance among displacement rates for individual climate variables, and divergence among displacement vector bearings. We use climate simulations to quantify climate novelty, displacement and divergence across Europe and eastern North America from the last glacial maximum to the present, and fossil pollen records to quantify vegetation novelty. Transient climate novelty is consistently the strongest predictor of transient vegetation novelty, while displacement rates (mean and variance) are equally important in Europe. However, transient vegetation novelty is lower in Europe and its relationship to climatic predictors is the opposite of expectation. For both continents, accumulated novelty is greater than transient novelty, and climate novelty is the strongest predictor of accumulated ecological novelty. These results suggest that controls on novel ecosystems vary with timescale and among continents, and that the twenty-first century emergence of novelty will be driven by both rapid rates of climate change and the emergence of novel climate states. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘The past is a foreign country: how much can the fossil record actually inform conservation?’

Understanding the mechanisms of climate that produce novel ecosystems is of joint interest to conservation biologists and palaeoecologists. Here, we define and differentiate transient from accumulated novelty and evaluate four climatic mechanisms proposed to cause species to reshuffle into novel assemblages: high climatic novelty, high spatial rates of change (displacement), high variance among displacement rates for individual climate variables, and divergence among displacement vector bearings. We use climate simulations to quantify climate novelty, displacement and divergence across Europe and eastern North America from the last glacial maximum to the present, and fossil pollen records to quantify vegetation novelty. Transient climate novelty is consistently the strongest predictor of transient vegetation novelty, while displacement rates (mean and variance) are equally important in Europe. However, transient vegetation novelty is lower in Europe and its relationship to climatic predictors is the opposite of expectation. For both continents, accumulated novelty is greater than transient novelty, and climate novelty is the strongest predictor of accumulated ecological novelty. These results suggest that controls on novel ecosystems vary with timescale and among continents, and that the twenty-first century emergence of novelty will be driven by both rapid rates of climate change and the emergence of novel climate states. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘The past is a foreign country: how much can the fossil record actually inform conservation?’