Many researchers in archaeology and the geosciences obtain timescales for their projects by radiocarbon dating plant or animal remains from the preserved deposits with which they work. Radiocarbon dates are not the same as calendar dates, however, and have to be corrected for variations in the radiocarbon content of the atmosphere at the time that the plant or animal lived. This conversion of radiocarbon dates to calendar ages, known as calibration, is not a straightforward correction. Calibration of radiocarbon dates can only be done by comparison to a suitable calibration curve. Such curves are based on measurements of radiocarbon in samples of known calendar age such as tree-rings, or in a less strict sense, on other types of samples where an independent method of dating can be used. For samples which grew in the ocean, such as shells and corals, a separate calibration curve is needed to account for changes in ocean water circulation which may bring up 'old' water from the ocean depths (the reservoir effect). The calibration curves have been refined periodically to provide better estimates of the calendar ages. In 2004, the IntCal Working Group constructed new calibration curves from radiocarbon dated tree-rings back to 12,400 years before present and from independently dated ocean samples, using an estimated correction for the reservoir effect, back to 26,000 years before present. Rather than simply averaging the data, these curves were constructed with statistical tools (models) that allowed for the uncertainty in the calendar ages of the samples used as well as the radiocarbon dates. At that time data beyond 26,000 years before present did not agree so no curve was provided but an estimate of how far the data sets differed from the underlying true curve was given. In the last few years a lot of research has gone into producing radiocarbon datasets from a variety of records. Many of these datasets are now in fairly good agreement so it should be possible to provide curves for estimating calendar ages back to 55,000 years before present. In addition new tree-ring records are becoming available which will improve the precision of the calibration curve. Statistical methods have also been rapidly advancing and so some of the simplifying assumptions that we made about the models in 2004 will no longer be necessary. Working in collaboration with the IntCal Working Group, this project will develop an easily maintainable database of calibration quality radiocarbon data to be used to produce updates to the calibration curves on a regular basis. Advances in statistics will allow us to improve on the previous models to further refine the calibration curves. Measurements of carefully selected coral will help determine what corrections are needed for ocean samples to be used in calibration curves. By improving radiocarbon calibration this project will improve the understanding of the sequence and timing of events in numerous studies in archaeology and in the reconstruction of past environments.

Climate change creates risks to biodiversity, in particular by changing the climate in which species live, and making it unsuitable for them to continue to live there. In December 2014, under the United Nations Paris Agreement countries agreed to 'pursue efforts to ...limit the temperature increase to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels'. IMPALA seeks to understand these risks to biodiversity arising in a future world in which humans limit climate change to 1.5C warming compared to pre-industrial times, and to compare this with the situation when there is 2C warming (hereafter referred to as 1.5/2C). It seeks understand the relative risks both globally, and at the regional scale. Species also face a challenge in being able to track their preferred climate space across a landscape, both in terms of the speed of movement required and in dealing with natural and/or manmade obstacles to movement. Several previous studies have projected extensive range loss and increased extinction risks across large fractions of species globally or regionally due to climate change e.g. amongst 50,000 species studied, 57+/-5% of plants and 34+/-7% of animals are projected to lose over half their climatic range for a warming of approximately 3.6C above pre-industrial levels. But what difference does 0.5C make? Is there really much difference between 1.5C and 2C of warming when it comes to terrestrial biodiversity? Examination of the large-scale potential changes in climatic ranges of 80,000 species at 2C versus 2.5C suggests that there may be a large difference, at least in some parts of the world. These differences have the potential to put much of the past investment in conservation at risk. This study will look at the areas where it makes the most difference to constrain warming to 1.5 versus 2C, looking specifically at Global Protected Areas, and key conservation regions such as biodiversity hotspots. It will identify which Protected Areas are most, and least, at risk from biodiversity changes at 1.5 vs. 2C, and where corridors between protected areas would do the most good. IMPALA is designed to inform decision makers in the UK government and also within environmental NGOs, in particular World Wildlife Fund-UK. Environmental NGOs are interested in conservation planning, that is deciding which areas of the world need to be brought into the protected area network, or protected by other means such as working with local people to protect habitats for species. Since it is not possible to protect all natural ecosystems, NGOs and Governments need to prioritise, and climate change will affect that prioritisation by changing the places where species can live. IMPALA will inform WWF-UK, other NGOs, and Governments whether the existing protected area system is robust to warming of 1.5/2C, which areas are most at risk, and which areas act as refuges where species can still live after 1.5/2C global warming has occurred. IMPALA considers how species try to move to track climate change, and will also identify places that need to be protected to enable species to move and colonize new areas in response to climate change. Complicating the efforts to allow ecosystems (and biodiversity) to adapt naturally to climate change may be the efforts needed to hold climate change to 1.5C of warming. Many proposals to limit warming to 1.5 and 2C of warming require large areas to be converted to bioenergy crops. There is the risk that it may be necessary to convert large areas of primary/secondary forest and other ecosystems to bioenergy crops, so that agricultural land can continue to grow food. As habitat loss is a major factor in biodiversity loss, then it might potentially be worse for biodiversity at 1.5C warming than 2C warming. This study will look for win-win solutions for biodiversity and mitigation in order to promote Article 2 compliant mitigation - that is, mitigation that hinders neither ecosystems from adapting naturally and the production of food.

Abstracts are not currently available in GtR for all funded research. This is normally because the abstract was not required at the time of proposal submission, but may be because it included sensitive information such as personal details.

Individuals, populations and species are expected to move, adapt or die in response to climate change. However, there are big gaps in our understanding of how these processes play out, making it difficult to predict what will happen in the future. One gap lies in the contribution of individual animal behaviour to these responses. However, it has been difficult to include behaviour in predictions because it is unclear how it scales-up to influence larger, more visible ecological patterns. Animal behaviour has received relatively little attention as a potential mediator of community-scale responses because predictions tend to focus on larger-scale, more visible impacts, such as species range shifts and extinctions. However, behaviour could provide an important piece of the puzzle because it can be modified much more rapidly than physiological tolerance, providing an almost instantaneous buffer against negative effects of climate change. Rapid responses are particularly important to cope with severe short-term disturbances; for example, our research has shown that following the coral reef mass bleaching event in 2016, reef fish decreased their aggressive interactions three-fold to conserve energy in what became a suboptimal environment. Whilst behavioural change might not deliver a lasting solution, the buffer it provides could be critical in such cases to buy extra time for ecosystem recovery or for longer-term physiological adaptations to develop. Yet rapid behavioural responses could also create unintended side effects by disrupting the "rules of engagement" that underlie community organisation. Therefore, it is imperative that we close this knowledge gap to enable accurate understanding and future predictions of species responses to climate change. Our project addresses this challenge by combining existing empirical data collected before and 6-12 months after a natural disturbance experiment with targeted collection of new data 3-4 years after the disturbance, to create an unprecedented time series of behavioural observations and multiple metrics that describe the ecological community. In addition, we will create theoretical models to reveal if and how changes in aggressive behaviour can alter the interactions between individuals of different species, and how this can scale up to re-organise ecological communities. Finally, we will test how closely these theoretical predictions match the field data to establish for the first time whether re-organisation of ecological communities following disturbance is triggered by modified behaviour. Coral reefs offer an excellent model system to test these questions because they host an incredible diversity of fishes that fight aggressively for access to resources, which is thought to be an important process for structuring the wider reef fish community. In 2016, an extended El Niño event of unprecedented strength led to sustained increases in ocean temperature throughout the Indo-Pacific, causing mass coral bleaching and subsequent mortality across the tropics. Our existing data provides a baseline for (before bleaching), and quantifies the initial rapid changes in (6-12 months after bleaching), fish behaviour and the structure of ecological communities across multiple reefs. As a result, we now have a unique opportunity to use this rare, large-scale natural experiment to explore how behaviour mediates community shifts in a realistic setting by incorporating a longer-term perspective. By quantifying these impacts in multiple locations, we can be sure that any observed changes are driven by the bleaching event, rather than other environmental or geological differences between reefs. Our work will generate the first robust theoretical hypotheses and empirical evidence for how behaviour mediates the wider ecosystem. The results will enhance understanding and enable ecologists to incorporate behaviour into predictions of species responses to climate change.

Regional-scale deteriorations in coral cover and reef architectural complexity, driven by a suite of environmental and climate-change related disturbances, have been documented, with the scale of global reef ecosystem change such that a cessation of reef accretion has been argued by many as the ultimate and imminent trajectory. One of the most pressing and fundamental challenges in coral reef science is thus to project the future for coral reefs under rapidly changing climatic and environmental conditions. Responses will likely vary region by region, and reef by reef, but will ultimately be determined by two basic sets of factors: 1) the ecology (and ecological responses to environmental change) of the key carbonate producers and eroders on a reef, because these interact to determine whether a reef has the potential to add new carbonate to its structure; and 2) the geomorphic evolutionary state and future growth potential of that reef as a function of its past growth history relative to sea level. Whilst there is an expansive and rapidly growing body of data on local and regional spatial scale contemporary ecological processes to inform this debate, there is a remarkable paucity of data on the age, growth history and morphogenetic evolutionary state of the reef structures on which these contemporary processes operate. Indeed, a review of the literature suggests that data on Holocene coral reef accretion rates (as a measure of net vertical reef growth over time) exists for something well below 1% of the World's coral reefs. This represents a major limitation in any attempts to project future rates of reef growth (and thus geomorphic change), and inherently inhibits attempts to integrate data on past rates and timescales of reef growth (at the individual reef scale) into assessments of future ecological states, and thus into management decision-making. For example, if a reef has been at sea level for the past several 100's to 1000's of years, and exists in an essentially senescent evolutionary state (a 'senile' state: sensu Hopley 1982), not only will its current habitat diversity be restricted but its immediate growth potential and its potential for sustained future growth will be severely impaired. The implications of this are clear - that the best informed management plans should integrate knowledge not only of contemporary reef ecology and habitat types but also, as a predictor of future potential geomorphic performance, an understanding of past and potential reef growth rates and of the current geomorphic evolutionary state of a reef. To address this issue, inclusive datasets are needed that can inform our understanding of: 1) when different reefs within individual regions started to grow; 2) how fast they accreted in different settings; 3) which reefs have been most actively accreting in the very recent past; and 4) which reefs, as a function of their current geomorphic state, have the greatest potential for further accretion in the future. The primary goal of this project is thus to address one part of the future reef trajectory challenge - the relevance and role of past geomorphic performance and of current reef evolutionary state as a predictor of future reef accretion potential. This has direct long-term management relevance because contemporary reef morphology is one of the key contributing factors that influences future morphology and thus the characteristics and diversity of reef habitats. Specifically, the project will develop new, spatially inclusive reef accretion and evolutionary state datasets - taking as a case site the inner-shelf regions of Australia's Great Barrier Reef. Whilst regionally focused, the work has global scale relevance because of the implications for understanding the links between reef growth histories, contemporary ecological states and future habitat complexity.