• Energy Research

Le pâturage représente l'utilisation la plus étendue des terres dans le monde. Pourtant, ses impacts sur les services écosystémiques restent incertains car des interactions omniprésentes entre la pression de pâturage, le climat, les propriétés des sols et la biodiversité peuvent se produire mais n'ont jamais été traitées simultanément. En utilisant une enquête standardisée sur 98 sites sur six continents, nous montrons que les interactions entre la pression du pâturage, le climat, le sol et la biodiversité sont essentielles pour expliquer la fourniture de services écosystémiques fondamentaux dans les zones arides du monde entier. L'augmentation de la pression de pâturage a réduit la prestation de services écosystémiques dans les zones arides plus chaudes et pauvres en espèces, tandis que les effets positifs du pâturage ont été observés dans les zones plus froides et riches en espèces. La prise en compte des interactions entre le pâturage et les facteurs abiotiques et biotiques locaux est essentielle pour comprendre le sort des écosystèmes des terres arides sous le changement climatique et l'augmentation de la pression humaine. El pastoreo representa el uso más extenso de la tierra en todo el mundo. Sin embargo, sus impactos en los servicios ecosistémicos siguen siendo inciertos porque las interacciones generalizadas entre la presión del pastoreo, el clima, las propiedades del suelo y la biodiversidad pueden ocurrir, pero nunca se han abordado simultáneamente. Utilizando una encuesta estandarizada en 98 sitios en seis continentes, mostramos que las interacciones entre la presión del pastoreo, el clima, el suelo y la biodiversidad son fundamentales para explicar la prestación de servicios ecosistémicos fundamentales en las tierras secas de todo el mundo. El aumento de la presión del pastoreo redujo la prestación de servicios ecosistémicos en las tierras secas más cálidas y pobres en especies, mientras que los efectos positivos del pastoreo se observaron en las zonas más frías y ricas en especies. Considerar las interacciones entre el pastoreo y los factores abióticos y bióticos locales es clave para comprender el destino de los ecosistemas de tierras secas bajo el cambio climático y el aumento de la presión humana. Grazing represents the most extensive use of land worldwide. Yet its impacts on ecosystem services remain uncertain because pervasive interactions between grazing pressure, climate, soil properties, and biodiversity may occur but have never been addressed simultaneously. Using a standardized survey at 98 sites across six continents, we show that interactions between grazing pressure, climate, soil, and biodiversity are critical to explain the delivery of fundamental ecosystem services across drylands worldwide. Increasing grazing pressure reduced ecosystem service delivery in warmer and species-poor drylands, whereas positive effects of grazing were observed in colder and species-rich areas. Considering interactions between grazing and local abiotic and biotic factors is key for understanding the fate of dryland ecosystems under climate change and increasing human pressure. يمثل الرعي الاستخدام الأوسع للأراضي في جميع أنحاء العالم. ومع ذلك، لا تزال آثاره على خدمات النظام الإيكولوجي غير مؤكدة لأن التفاعلات المنتشرة بين ضغط الرعي والمناخ وخصائص التربة والتنوع البيولوجي قد تحدث ولكن لم تتم معالجتها أبدًا في وقت واحد. باستخدام مسح موحد في 98 موقعًا في ست قارات، نوضح أن التفاعلات بين ضغط الرعي والمناخ والتربة والتنوع البيولوجي ضرورية لشرح تقديم خدمات النظام الإيكولوجي الأساسية عبر الأراضي الجافة في جميع أنحاء العالم. أدى الضغط المتزايد للرعي إلى تقليل تقديم خدمات النظام الإيكولوجي في الأراضي الجافة الأكثر دفئًا والفقيرة بالأنواع، في حين لوحظت آثار إيجابية للرعي في المناطق الأكثر برودة والغنية بالأنواع. يعتبر النظر في التفاعلات بين الرعي والعوامل المحلية اللاأحيائية والأحيائية أمرًا أساسيًا لفهم مصير النظم الإيكولوجية للأراضي الجافة في ظل تغير المناخ وزيادة الضغط البشري.

This research was funded by the European Research Council (ERC Grant agreement 647038, BIODESERT), the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (PID2020-116578RB-I00) and Generalitat Valenciana (CIDEGENT/2018/041), with additional support by the University of Alicante (UADIF22-74 and VIGROB22-350). F.T.M. acknowledges support from the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) and the KAUST Climate and Livability Initiative. D.J.E. is supported by the Hermon Slade Foundation. H.S. is supported by a María Zambrano fellowship funded by the Ministry of Universities and European Union-Next Generation plan. L.W. acknowledges support from the US National Science Foundation (EAR 1554894). B.B. and S.S. were supported by the Taylor Family–Asia Foundation Endowed Chair in Ecology and Conservation Biology. M.B. acknowledges support from a Ramón y Cajal grant from the Spanish Ministry of Science (RYC2021-031797-I). A.L. and L.K. acknowledge support from the German Research Foundation, DFG (grant CRC TRR228) and German Federal Government for Science and Education, BMBF (grants 01LL1802C and 01LC1821A). L.K. acknowledges travel funds from the Hans Merensky Foundation. A.N. and C. Branquinho acknowledge support from FCT—Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (CEECIND/02453/2018/CP1534/CT0001, PTDC/ASP-SIL/7743/2020, UIDB/00329/2020), from AdaptForGrazing project (PRR-C05-i03-I-000035) and from LTsER Montado platform (LTER_EU_PT_001). S.C.R. was supported by NASA (NNH22OB92A) and is grateful to E. Geiger, A. Howell, R. Reibold, N. Melone and M. Starbuck for field support. Any use of trade, firm or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the US Government. We thank the landowners for granting access to the sites and many people and their institutions for supporting our fieldwork activities: L. Eloff, J. J. Jordaan, E. Mudongo, V. Mokoka, B. Mokhou, T. Maphanga, D. Thompson (SAEON), A. S. K. Frank, R. Matjea, F. Hoffmann, C. Goebel, the University of Limpopo, South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON), the South African Military and the Scientific Services Kruger National Park. Mineral-associated organic carbon (MAOC) constitutes a major fraction of global soil carbon and is assumed less sensitive to climate than particulate organic carbon (POC) due to protection by minerals. Despite its importance for long-term carbon storage, the response of MAOC to changing climates in drylands, which cover more than 40% of the global land area, remains unexplored. Here we assess topsoil organic carbon fractions across global drylands using a standardized field survey in 326 plots from 25 countries and 6 continents. We find that soil biogeochemistry explained the majority of variation in both MAOC and POC. Both carbon fractions decreased with increases in mean annual temperature and reductions in precipitation, with MAOC responding similarly to POC. Therefore, our results suggest that ongoing climate warming and aridification may result in unforeseen carbon losses across global drylands, and that the protective role of minerals may not dampen these effects. 19 páginas total artículo.- 3 figuras.- 33 referencias y 4 figuras.- 2 tablas.- 68 referencias.- The online version contains supplementary material available and extended data is available for this paper at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-024-02087-y No

Grazing represents the most extensive use of land worldwide. Yet its impacts on ecosystem services remain uncertain because pervasive interactions between grazing pressure, climate, soil properties, and biodiversity may occur but have never been addressed simultaneously. Using a standardized survey at 98 sites across six continents, we show that interactions between grazing pressure, climate, soil, and biodiversity are critical to explain the delivery of fundamental ecosystem services across drylands worldwide. Increasing grazing pressure reduced ecosystem service delivery in warmer and species-poor drylands, whereas positive effects of grazing were observed in colder and species-rich areas. Considering interactions between grazing and local abiotic and biotic factors is key for understanding the fate of dryland ecosystems under climate change and increasing human pressure.

AbstractAimThe scale of environmental data is often defined by their extent (spatial area, temporal duration) and resolution (grain size, temporal interval). Although describing climate data scale via these terms is appropriate for most meteorological applications, for ecology and biogeography, climate data of the same spatiotemporal resolution and extent may differ in their relevance to an organism. Here, we propose that climate proximity, or how well climate data represent the actual conditions that an organism is exposed to, is more important for ecological realism than the spatiotemporal resolution of the climate data.LocationTemperature comparison in nine countries across four continents; ecological case studies in Alberta (Canada), Sabah (Malaysia) and North Carolina/Tennessee (USA).Time Period1960–2018.Major Taxa StudiedCase studies with flies, mosquitoes and salamanders, but concepts relevant to all life on earth.MethodsWe compare the accuracy of two macroclimate data sources (ERA5 and WorldClim) and a novel microclimate model (microclimf) in predicting soil temperatures. We then use ERA5, WorldClim and microclimf to drive ecological models in three case studies: temporal (fly phenology), spatial (mosquito thermal suitability) and spatiotemporal (salamander range shifts) ecological responses.ResultsFor predicting soil temperatures, microclimf had 24.9% and 16.4% lower absolute bias than ERA5 and WorldClim respectively. Across the case studies, we find that increasing proximity (from macroclimate to microclimate) yields a 247% improvement in performance of ecological models on average, compared to 18% and 9% improvements from increasing spatial resolution 20‐fold, and temporal resolution 30‐fold respectively.Main ConclusionsWe propose that increasing climate proximity, even if at the sacrifice of finer climate spatiotemporal resolution, may improve ecological predictions. We emphasize biophysically informed approaches, rather than generic formulations, when quantifying ecoclimatic relationships. Redefining the scale of climate through the lens of the organism itself helps reveal mechanisms underlying how climate shapes ecological systems.

AbstractCurrent analyses and predictions of spatially explicit patterns and processes in ecology most often rely on climate data interpolated from standardized weather stations. This interpolated climate data represents long‐term average thermal conditions at coarse spatial resolutions only. Hence, many climate‐forcing factors that operate at fine spatiotemporal resolutions are overlooked. This is particularly important in relation to effects of observation height (e.g. vegetation, snow and soil characteristics) and in habitats varying in their exposure to radiation, moisture and wind (e.g. topography, radiative forcing or cold‐air pooling). Since organisms living close to the ground relate more strongly to these microclimatic conditions than to free‐air temperatures, microclimatic ground and near‐surface data are needed to provide realistic forecasts of the fate of such organisms under anthropogenic climate change, as well as of the functioning of the ecosystems they live in. To fill this critical gap, we highlight a call for temperature time series submissions to SoilTemp, a geospatial database initiative compiling soil and near‐surface temperature data from all over the world. Currently, this database contains time series from 7,538 temperature sensors from 51 countries across all key biomes. The database will pave the way toward an improved global understanding of microclimate and bridge the gap between the available climate data and the climate at fine spatiotemporal resolutions relevant to most organisms and ecosystem processes.