Extreme heterogeneity of population response to climatic variation and the limits of prediction

Certain general facets of biotic response to climate change, such as shifts in phenology and geographic distribution, are well characterized; however, it is not clear whether the observed similarity of responses across taxa will extend to variation in other population‐level processes. We examined population response to climatic variation using long‐term incidence data (collected over 42 years) encompassing 149 butterfly species and considerable habitat diversity (10 sites along an elevational gradient from sea level to over 2,700 m in California). Population responses were characterized by extreme heterogeneity that was not attributable to differences in species composition among sites. These results indicate that habitat heterogeneity might be a buffer against climate change and highlight important questions about mechanisms maintaining interpopulation differences in responses to weather. Despite overall heterogeneity of response, population dynamics were accurately predicted by our model for many species at each site. However, the overall correlation between observed and predicted incidence in a cross validation analysis was moderate (Pearson's r = 0.23, SE 0.01), and 97% of observed data fell within the predicted 95% credible intervals. Prediction was most successful for more abundant species as well as for sites with lower annual turnover. Population‐level heterogeneity in response to climate variation and the limits of our predictive power highlight the challenges for a future of increasing climatic variability.     

Seasonal changes in the response of winter wheat to elevated atmospheric CO2 concentration grown in Open-Top Chambers and field tracking enclosures

Winter wheat was grown at ambient and elevated (ambient plus 350 μL L^–1) CO₂ concentrations in open top chambers and in field-tracking sun-lit climatized enclosures (elevated is 718 μL L^–1). There was no significant effect of CO₂ concentration on sheath, leaf and root biomass and leaf area in the early spring (January to April). 24-h canopy CO₂ exchange rate (CCER) was not significantly affected either. However, elevated CO₂ concentration increased CCER at midday, decreased evapotranspiration rate and increased instantaneous water-use-efficiency during early spring. Leaf, sheath and root nitrogen concentration per unit dry weight decreased and nonstructural carbohydrate concentration increased under elevated CO₂, and N-uptake per unit ground area decreased significantly (– 22%) towards the end of this period. These results contrast with results from the final harvest, when grain yield and biomass were increased by 19% under elevated CO₂. N concentration per dry weight was reduced by 5%, but N-uptake per unit ground area was significantly higher (+ 11%) for the elevated CO₂ treatment. 24-h and midday-CCER increased significantly more in late spring (period of 21 April to 30 May) (respectively by + 40% and 53%) than in the early spring (respectively 5% and 19%) in response to elevated CO₂. Midday evapotranspiration rate was reduced less by elevated CO₂ in the late spring (– 13%) than in early spring (– 21%). The CO₂ response of midday and 24-h CCER decreased again (+ 27% and + 23% resp.) towards the end of the growing season. We conclude that the low response to CO₂ concentration during the early spring was associated with a growth-restriction, caused by low temperature and irradiance levels. The reduction of nitrogen concentration, the increase of nonstructural carbohydrate, and the lower evapotranspiration indicated that CO₂ did have an effect towards the end of early spring, but not on biomass accumulation. Regression analysis showed that both irradiance and temperature affected the response to CO₂.