Anthropogenic climate change is predicted to be a major cause of species extinctions in the next 100 years. But what will actually cause these extinctions? For example, will it be limited physiological tolerance to high temperatures, changing biotic interactions or other factors? Here, we systematically review the proximate causes of climate-change related extinctions and their empirical support. We find 136 case studies of climatic impacts that are potentially relevant to this topic. However, only seven identified proximate causes of demonstrated local extinctions due to anthropogenic climate change. Among these seven studies, the proximate causes vary widely. Surprisingly, none show a straightforward relationship between local extinction and limited tolerances to high temperature. Instead, many studies implicate species interactions as an important proximate cause, especially decreases in food availability. We find very similar patterns in studies showing decreases in abundance associated with climate change, and in those studies showing impacts of climatic oscillations. Collectively, these results highlight our disturbingly limited knowledge of this crucial issue but also support the idea that changing species interactions are an important cause of documented population declines and extinctions related to climate change. Finally, we briefly outline general research strategies for identifying these proximate causes in future studies.

Aim The factors that set species range limits underlie many patterns in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. These factors have been the subject of several reviews, but there has been no systematic review of the causes of warm-edge limits (low elevations and latitudes). Understanding these causes is urgent, given that the factors that set these limits might also drive extinction at warm edges as global climate changes. Many authors have suggested that warm-edge limits are set by biotic factors (particularly competition) whereas others have stressed abiotic factors (particularly temperature). We synthesize the known causes of species' warm-edge range limits, with emphasis on the underlying mechanisms (proximate causes).Location Global.Methods We systematically searched the literature for studies testing the causes of warm-edge range limits.Results We found 125 studies that address the causes of warm-edge limits, from a search including > 4000 studies. Among the species in these studies, abiotic factors are supported more often than biotic factors in setting species range limits at warm edges, in contrast to the widely held view that biotic factors are more important. Studies that test both types of factors support abiotic factors significantly more frequently. In addition, only 23 studies (61 species) identified proximate causes of these limits, and these overwhelmingly support physiological tolerances to abiotic factors (primarily temperature). Only eight species with identified proximate causes were tested for both biotic and abiotic factors, but the majority support abiotic factors.Main conclusions Although it is often assumed that warm-edge limits are set by biotic factors, our review shows that abiotic factors are supported more often among the species in these 125 studies. However, few studies both identify proximate causes and test alternative mechanisms, or examine the interaction between biotic and abiotic factors. Filling these gaps should be a high priority as warm-edge populations are increasingly driven to extinction by climate change.

Marine environmental monitoring has tended to focus on site-specific methods of investigation. These traditional methods have low spatial and temporal resolution and are relatively labor intensive per unit area/time that they cover. To implement the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), European Member States are required to improve marine monitoring and design monitoring networks. This can be achieved by developing and testing innovative and cost-effective monitoring systems, as well as indicators of environmental status. Here, we present several recently developed methodologies and technologies to improve marine biodiversity indicators and monitoring methods. The innovative tools are discussed concerning the technologies presently utilized as well as the advantages and disadvantages of their use in routine monitoring. In particular, the present analysis focuses on: (i) molecular approaches, including microarray, Real Time quantitative PCR (qPCR), and metagenetic (metabarcoding) tools; (ii) optical (remote) sensing and acoustic methods; and (iii) in situ monitoring instruments. We also discuss Danovaro et al. Innovative Approaches in Marine Monitoring their applications in marine monitoring within the MSFD through the analysis of case studies in order to evaluate their potential utilization in future routine marine monitoring. We show that these recently-developed technologies can present clear advantages in accuracy, efficiency and cost.