• Energy Research

Freshwater biodiversity loss is accelerating globally, but humanity can change this trajectory through actions that enable recovery. To be successful, these actions require coordination and planning at a global scale. The Emergency Recovery Plan for global freshwater biodiversity aims to reduce the risk for freshwater biodiversity loss through six priority actions: (1) accelerate implementation of environmental flows; (2) improve water quality to sustain aquatic life; (3) protect and restore critical habitats; (4) manage exploitation of freshwater species and riverine aggregates; (5) prevent and control nonnative species invasions in freshwater habitats; and (6) safeguard and restore freshwater connectivity. These actions can be implemented using future-proofing approaches that anticipate future risks (e.g., emerging pollutants, new invaders, and synergistic effects) and minimize likely stressors to make conservation of freshwater biodiversity more resilient to climate change and other global environmental challenges. While uncertainty with respect to past observations is not a new concern for freshwater biodiversity, future-proofing has the distinction of accounting for the uncertainty of future conditions that have no historical baseline. The level of uncertainty with respect to future conditions is unprecedented. Future-proofing of the Emergency Recovery Plan for freshwater biodiversity will require anticipating future changes and developing and implementing actions to address those future changes. Here, we showcase future-proofing approaches likely to be successful using local case studies and examples. Ensuring that response options within the Emergency Recovery Plan are future-proofed will provide decision makers with science-informed choices, even in the face of uncertain and potentially new future conditions. We are at an inflection point for global freshwater biodiversity loss; learning from defeats and successes can support improved actions toward a sustainable future.

To date, few studies have evaluated sub-organismal responses (e.g., physiological or energetic consequences) of individual fish to hydropower infrastructure (e.g., fishways, turbines) or operations (e.g., fluctuating flows, low flows). The field of “conservation physiology” (i.e., the use of physiological information to enhance conservation) is expanding rapidly and has great promise for hydropower research. However, there is a need to both expand the “toolbox” available to practitioners and to validate these tools for use in this context. This synthetic report details the behavioural, energetic, genomic, molecular, forensic, isotopic, and physiological tools available for studying sub-organismal responses of fish to hydropower infrastructure and operating procedures with a critical assessment of their benefits and limitations. Furthermore, this paper provides two case studies where behavioural, energetic, and physiological tools have been used in hydropower settings. Progressive and interdisciplinary approaches to hydropower research are needed to advance the science of sustainable river regulation and hydropower development. The expanded toolbox could be used by practitioners to assess fishway performance, migration delays, and fish responses to fluctuating flows through a more mechanistic approach than can be offered by only focusing on population metrics or indices of community structure. These tools are also relevant for the evaluation of other anthropogenic impacts such as water withdrawal for irrigation or drinking water, habitat alteration, and fisheries interactions.

AbstractThere is growing evidence that bioenergetics can explain relationships between environmental conditions and fish behaviour, distribution and fitness. Fish energetic needs increase predictably with water temperature, but metabolic performance (i.e., aerobic scope) exhibits varied relationships, and there is debate about its role in shaping fish ecology. Here we present an energetics–performance framework, which posits that ecological context determines whether energy expenditure or metabolic performance influence fish behaviour and fitness. From this framework, we present testable predictions about how temperature‐driven variability in energetic demands and metabolic performance interact with ecological conditions to influence fish behaviour, distribution and fitness. Specifically, factors such as prey availability and the spatial distributions of prey and predators may alter fish temperature selection relative to metabolic and energetic optima. Furthermore, metabolic flexibility is a key determinant of how fish will respond to changing conditions, such as those predicted with climate change. With few exceptions, these predictions have rarely been tested in the wild due partly to difficulties in remotely measuring aspects of fish energetics. However, with recent advances in technology and measurement techniques, we now have a better capacity to measure bioenergetics parameters in the wild. Testing these predictions will provide a more mechanistic understanding of how ecological factors affect fish fitness and population dynamics, advancing our knowledge of how species and ecosystems will respond to rapidly changing environments.

Despite growing interest in conservation physiology, practical examples of how physiology has helped to understand or to solve conservation problems remain scarce. Over the past decade, an interdisciplinary research team has used a conservation physiology approach to address topical conservation concerns for Pacific salmon. Here, we review how novel applications of tools such as physiological telemetry, functional genomics and laboratory experiments on cardiorespiratory physiology have shed light on the effect of fisheries capture and release, disease and individual condition, and stock-specific consequences of warming river temperatures, respectively, and discuss how these findings have or have not benefited Pacific salmon management. Overall, physiological tools have provided remarkable insights into the effects of fisheries capture and have helped to enhance techniques for facilitating recovery from fisheries capture. Stock-specific cardiorespiratory thresholds for thermal tolerances have been identified for sockeye salmon and can be used by managers to better predict migration success, representing a rare example that links a physiological scope to fitness in the wild population. Functional genomics approaches have identified physiological signatures predictive of individual migration mortality. Although fisheries managers are primarily concerned with population-level processes, understanding the causes of en route mortality provides a mechanistic explanation and can be used to refine management models. We discuss the challenges that we have overcome, as well as those that we continue to face, in making conservation physiology relevant to managers of Pacific salmon.

Arguments for the need to conserve aquatic predator (AP) populations often focus on the ecological and socioeconomic roles they play. Here, we summarize the diverse ecosystem functions and services connected to APs, including regulating food webs, cycling nutrients, engineering habitats, transmitting diseases/parasites, mediating ecological invasions, affecting climate, supporting fisheries, generating tourism, and providing bioinspiration. In some cases, human-driven declines and increases in AP populations have altered these ecosystem functions and services. We present a social ecological framework for supporting adaptive management decisions involving APs in response to social and environmental change. We also identify outstanding questions to guide future research on the ecological functions and ecosystem services of APs in a changing world.

Abstract Animals are expected to be judicious in the use of the energy they gain due to the costs and limits associated with its intake. The management of energy expenditure (EE) exhibited by animals has previously been considered in terms of three patterns: the constrained, independent and performance patterns of energy management. These patterns can be interpreted by regressing daily EE against maintenance EE measured over extended periods. From the multiple studies on this topic, there is equivocal evidence about the existence of universal patterns in certain aspects of energy management. The implicit assumption that animals exhibit specifically one of three discrete energy management patterns, and without variation, seems simplistic. We suggest that animals can exhibit gradations of different energy management patterns and that the exact pattern will fluctuate as their environmental context changes. To investigate these ideas, and for possible large‐scale patterns in energy management, we analysed long‐term heart rate data—a strong proxy for EE—across and within individuals in 16 species of birds, mammals and fish. Our analyses of 292 individuals representing 46,539 observation‐days suggest that vertebrates typically exhibit predominantly the independent or performance energy patterns at the across‐individual level, and that the pattern does not associate with taxonomic group. Within individuals, however, animals generally exhibit some degree of energy constraint. Together, these findings indicate that across diverse species, some individuals supply more energy to all aspects of their life than do others, however all individuals must trade‐off deployment of their available energy between competing functions. This demonstrates that within‐individual analyses are essential for the interpretation of energy management patterns. We also found that species do not necessarily exhibit a fixed energy management pattern but rather temporal variation in their energy management over the year. Animals’ energy management exhibited stronger energy constraint during periods of higher EE, which typically coincided with clear and key life cycle events such as reproduction, suggesting an adaptive plasticity to respond to fluctuating energy demands. A plain language summary is available for this article.

Arctic biodiversity is under threat from both climate-induced environmental change and anthropogenic activity. However, the rapid rate of change and the challenging conditions for studying Arctic environments mean that many research questions must be answered before we can strategically allocate resources for management. Addressing threats to biodiversity in the Arctic is further complicated by the region's complex geopolitics, as eight countries claim jurisdiction over the area, with multiple local considerations such as Indigenous sovereignty and resource rights. Here, we identify research priorities to serve as a starting point for addressing the most pressing threats to Arctic biodiversity. We began by collecting pressing research questions about Arctic biodiversity, thematizing them as either threats or actions, and then categorizing them further into 18 groups. Then, drawing on cross-disciplinary and global expertise of professionals in Arctic science, management, and policy, we considered the barriers to answering these questions and proposed potential solutions that could be implemented if barriers were overcome. Overall, our horizon scan provides an expert assessment of threats (e.g., species’ responses to climate change) and actions (e.g., a lack of fundamental information regarding Arctic biodiversity) needing attention and is intended to guide future conservation action within the Arctic.