Anthropocene refugia: integrating history and predictive modelling to assess the space available for biodiversity in a human-dominated world

Abstract

During periods of strong environmental change, some areas may serve as refugia, where components of biodiversity can find protection, persist and potentially expand from should conditions again become favourable. The refugia concept has previously been used in the context of climatic change, to describe climatically stable areas in which taxa survived past Quaternary glacial–interglacial oscillations, or where they might persist in the future under anthropogenic climate change. However, with the recognition that Earth has entered the Anthropocene, an era in which human activities are the dominant driving force on ecosystems, it is critical to also consider human pressures on the environment as factors limiting species distributions. Here, we present a novel concept, Anthropocene refugia, to refer to areas that provide spatial and temporal protection from human activities and that will remain suitable for a given taxonomic unit in the long-term. It integrates a deep-time perspective on species biogeography that provides information on the natural rather than current-day relictual distribution of species, with spatial information on modern and future anthropogenic threats. We define the concept and propose a methodology to effectively identify and map realized and potential current and future refugia, using examples for two megafaunal species as a proof of concept. We argue that identifying Anthropocene refugia will improve biodiversity conservation and restoration by allowing better prediction of key areas for conservation and potential for re-expansions today and in the future. More generally, it forms a new conceptual framework to assess and manage the impact of anthropogenic activities on past, current and future patterns of species distributions. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘The past is a foreign country: how much can the fossil record actually inform conservation?’

Current and Future Influence of Environmental Factors on Small Pelagic Fish Distributions in the Northwestern Mediterranean Sea

“…However, the identified areas could be seen as "future climate refuges" for these species. Identifying areas that are most likely to persist under adverse climate change conditions in the future is important for anticipating the complex impacts that climate change will have on ecosystems and societies (Monsarrat et al, 2019). The socio-ecological implications of some species that recolonize part of their historical niche or occupy new areas should be carefully considered, in particular for species with a high socio-ecological interest such as small pelagic fishes.…”

“…Such areas can act as sources of re-colonization when environmental conditions improve and often have long-lasting imprints on species distributions. We argue that identifying climate refuges can provide essential knowledge to improve the SPF management by identifying key areas for conservation of these species and potential for re-expansions both today and in the future (Monsarrat et al, 2019).…”

Management implications based on diversity patterns under climate change scenarios in a continental island biodiversity hotspot

“…By this, our study urges scientists and authorities to aim the conservation effort at areas with overlaps among PAs and climate refugia, characterized simultaneously by high diversity and EDGE scores (including the 11 taxa with the highest EDGE score), as well as serving as mixed-endemism centres. These areas are qualified as future climate refugia and may actually constitute Anthropocene refugia (Monsarrat et al, 2019). By doing so, this 'climate-smart', cost-effective conservation prioritization planning will allow the preservation of evolutionary heritage, trait diversity and future services for human well-being (Veron et al, 2019).…”

Spatial prioritization for biodiversity conservation in a megadiverse country

“…Humanity has to address efforts to stop "biological annihilation" based on population decline and species extirpation, which has negative cascading consequences on ecosystem functioning and services (Ceballos et al, 2017;Monsarrat et al, 2019). The loss of biodiversity is the result of several drivers and their interactions, including land-use/cover-change (LUCC), climate change (CC), species invasion and disease (Brook et al, 2008;Sala et al, 2000).…”

“…The loss of biodiversity is the result of several drivers and their interactions, including land-use/cover-change (LUCC), climate change (CC), species invasion and disease (Brook et al, 2008;Sala et al, 2000). However, the effects of CC on the LUCC process and their combined effects on biodiversity are uncertain (Monsarrat et al, 2019;Oliver and Morecroft, 2014). In the tropics, LUCC is expected to be the major force of change, but other studies have suggested that CC may play an important role, particularly for mammals (Paniw et al, 2019).…”