Patchy field sampling biases understanding of climate change impacts across the Arctic

Abstract

Effective societal responses to rapid climate change in the Arctic rely on an accurate representation of region-specific ecosystem properties and processes. However, this is limited by the scarcity and patchy distribution of field measurements. Here, we use a comprehensive, geo-referenced database of primary field measurements in 1,840 published studies across the Arctic to identify statistically significant spatial biases in field sampling and study citation across this globally important region. We find that 31% of all study citations are derived from sites located within 50 km of just two research sites: Toolik Lake in the USA and Abisko in Sweden. Furthermore, relatively colder, more rapidly warming and sparsely vegetated sites are under-sampled and under-recognized in terms of citations, particularly among microbiology-related studies. The poorly sampled and cited areas, mainly in the Canadian high-Arctic archipelago and the Arctic coastline of Russia, constitute a large fraction of the Arctic ice-free land area. Our results suggest that the current pattern of sampling and citation may bias the scientific consensuses that underpin attempts to accurately predict and effectively mitigate climate change in the region. Further work is required to increase both the quality and quantity of sampling, and incorporate existing literature from poorly cited areas to generate a more representative picture of Arctic climate change and its environmental impacts.

Stream metabolism controls diel patterns and evasion of CO2 in Arctic streams

“…However, the Arctic is large and diverse, with variation in permafrost extent and soil C storage (Hugelius et al, ), as well as regional differences in vegetation structure and growth trends (Huang et al, ), which together underpin largely unknown variability in stream biogeochemistry and aquatic ecosystem dynamics. Thus, multiple Arctic regions may respond uniquely to global change, and this variability needs to be captured in future studies, given current focus on few Arctic areas (Metcalfe et al, ). Regardless, owing to the importance of the Arctic C feedback on climate change (Schuur et al, ) and the dependence of stream respiration to discharge and C supply (Demars, ), we suggest to include stream metabolism and its response to environmental change (e.g.…”

Uneven global distribution of food web studies under climate change

“…While some biomes are proportionally well sampled, even within those biomes, the study sites are sometimes clustered around single locations, calling into question how generalizable those results are for an entire region, especially in regions where the climate is changing rapidly (Metcalfe et al. ).…”

“…"global" climate change impacts found a severe geographic bias and noted that generalizing results from temperate areas to the globe is problematic because tropical species may be expected to respond differently to climate change than temperate species (Feeley et al 2017). While some biomes are proportionally well sampled, even within those biomes, the study sites are sometimes clustered around single locations, calling into question how generalizable those results are for an entire region, especially in regions where the climate is changing rapidly (Metcalfe et al 2018).…”

Identifying multidisciplinary research gaps across Arctic terrestrial gradients

“…Here, we use a quantitative framework based on multivariate statistical modeling to present the current state of sampling across environmental science disciplines in the Arctic. We utilize an existing database of field studies across the Arctic that was developed by Metcalfe et al (2018). We build upon this earlier work with a more comprehensive and detailed investigation of how locations and citations within different disciplines are distributed across Arctic topographical, soil and vegetation conditions, and provide recommendations for potential new study areas in different disciplines.…”