生理学生物气候学揭示了意想不到的温度时空趋势。

IF 2.6 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Conservation Physiology Pub Date : 2024-05-16 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1093/conphys/coae025
Aubrey Foulk, Tarik Gouhier, Francis Choi, Jessica L Torossian, Allison Matzelle, David Sittenfeld, Brian Helmuth
{"title":"生理学生物气候学揭示了意想不到的温度时空趋势。","authors":"Aubrey Foulk, Tarik Gouhier, Francis Choi, Jessica L Torossian, Allison Matzelle, David Sittenfeld, Brian Helmuth","doi":"10.1093/conphys/coae025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Body temperature is universally recognized as a dominant driver of biological performance. Although the critical distinction between the temperature of an organism and its surrounding habitat has long been recognized, it remains common practice to assume that trends in air temperature-collected via remote sensing or weather stations-are diagnostic of trends in animal temperature and thus of spatiotemporal patterns of physiological stress and mortality risk. Here, by analysing long-term trends recorded by biomimetic temperature sensors designed to emulate intertidal mussel temperature across the US Pacific Coast, we show that trends in maximal organismal temperature ('organismal climatologies') during aerial exposure can differ substantially from those exhibited by co-located environmental data products. Specifically, using linear regression to compare maximal organismal and environmental (air temperature) climatologies, we show that not only are the magnitudes of body and air temperature markedly different, as expected, but so are their temporal trends at both local and biogeographic scales, with some sites showing significant decadal-scale increases in organismal temperature despite reductions in air temperature, or vice versa. The idiosyncratic relationship between the spatiotemporal patterns of organismal and air temperatures suggests that environmental climatology cannot be statistically corrected to serve as an accurate proxy for organismal climatology. Finally, using quantile regression, we show that spatiotemporal trends vary across the distribution of organismal temperature, with extremes shifting in different directions and at different rates than average metrics. Overall, our results highlight the importance of quantifying changes in the entire distribution of temperature to better predict biological performance and dispel the notion that raw or 'corrected' environmental (and specially air temperature) climatologies can be used to predict organismal temperature trends. Hence, despite their widespread coverage and availability, the severe limitations of environmental climatologies suggest that their role in conservation and management policy should be carefully considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":54331,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Physiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11109819/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physiologically informed organismal climatologies reveal unexpected spatiotemporal trends in temperature.\",\"authors\":\"Aubrey Foulk, Tarik Gouhier, Francis Choi, Jessica L Torossian, Allison Matzelle, David Sittenfeld, Brian Helmuth\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/conphys/coae025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Body temperature is universally recognized as a dominant driver of biological performance. Although the critical distinction between the temperature of an organism and its surrounding habitat has long been recognized, it remains common practice to assume that trends in air temperature-collected via remote sensing or weather stations-are diagnostic of trends in animal temperature and thus of spatiotemporal patterns of physiological stress and mortality risk. Here, by analysing long-term trends recorded by biomimetic temperature sensors designed to emulate intertidal mussel temperature across the US Pacific Coast, we show that trends in maximal organismal temperature ('organismal climatologies') during aerial exposure can differ substantially from those exhibited by co-located environmental data products. Specifically, using linear regression to compare maximal organismal and environmental (air temperature) climatologies, we show that not only are the magnitudes of body and air temperature markedly different, as expected, but so are their temporal trends at both local and biogeographic scales, with some sites showing significant decadal-scale increases in organismal temperature despite reductions in air temperature, or vice versa. The idiosyncratic relationship between the spatiotemporal patterns of organismal and air temperatures suggests that environmental climatology cannot be statistically corrected to serve as an accurate proxy for organismal climatology. Finally, using quantile regression, we show that spatiotemporal trends vary across the distribution of organismal temperature, with extremes shifting in different directions and at different rates than average metrics. Overall, our results highlight the importance of quantifying changes in the entire distribution of temperature to better predict biological performance and dispel the notion that raw or 'corrected' environmental (and specially air temperature) climatologies can be used to predict organismal temperature trends. Hence, despite their widespread coverage and availability, the severe limitations of environmental climatologies suggest that their role in conservation and management policy should be carefully considered.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54331,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Physiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11109819/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Physiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/conphys/coae025\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Physiology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/conphys/coae025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

体温被普遍认为是生物体能的主要驱动因素。尽管人们早已认识到生物体温度与其周围栖息地温度之间的重要区别,但通常的做法仍然是假定通过遥感或气象站收集的空气温度趋势可以诊断动物体温的趋势,从而诊断生理压力和死亡风险的时空模式。在这里,我们通过分析美国太平洋沿岸模拟潮间带贻贝温度的生物模拟温度传感器所记录的长期趋势,表明在空中暴露期间生物体最高温度("生物体气候")的趋势可能与同位环境数据产品所显示的趋势大不相同。具体来说,我们使用线性回归法比较了生物体和环境(空气温度)的最大气候,结果表明,不仅如预期的那样,体温和空气温度的大小明显不同,而且它们在当地和生物地理尺度上的时间趋势也不同,有些地点尽管空气温度降低,但生物体温度却在十年尺度上显著上升,反之亦然。生物体温度和空气温度时空模式之间的特异性关系表明,环境气候学无法通过统计校正作为生物体气候学的准确替代。最后,我们利用量值回归表明,生物体温度分布的时空趋势各不相同,极端温度与平均温度的变化方向和速度也不同。总之,我们的研究结果凸显了量化整个温度分布变化对更好地预测生物表现的重要性,并消除了原始或 "校正 "环境(特别是气温)气候学可用于预测生物体温度趋势的观点。因此,尽管环境气候学具有广泛的覆盖面和可用性,但其严重的局限性表明,应仔细考虑其在保护和管理政策中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Physiologically informed organismal climatologies reveal unexpected spatiotemporal trends in temperature.

Body temperature is universally recognized as a dominant driver of biological performance. Although the critical distinction between the temperature of an organism and its surrounding habitat has long been recognized, it remains common practice to assume that trends in air temperature-collected via remote sensing or weather stations-are diagnostic of trends in animal temperature and thus of spatiotemporal patterns of physiological stress and mortality risk. Here, by analysing long-term trends recorded by biomimetic temperature sensors designed to emulate intertidal mussel temperature across the US Pacific Coast, we show that trends in maximal organismal temperature ('organismal climatologies') during aerial exposure can differ substantially from those exhibited by co-located environmental data products. Specifically, using linear regression to compare maximal organismal and environmental (air temperature) climatologies, we show that not only are the magnitudes of body and air temperature markedly different, as expected, but so are their temporal trends at both local and biogeographic scales, with some sites showing significant decadal-scale increases in organismal temperature despite reductions in air temperature, or vice versa. The idiosyncratic relationship between the spatiotemporal patterns of organismal and air temperatures suggests that environmental climatology cannot be statistically corrected to serve as an accurate proxy for organismal climatology. Finally, using quantile regression, we show that spatiotemporal trends vary across the distribution of organismal temperature, with extremes shifting in different directions and at different rates than average metrics. Overall, our results highlight the importance of quantifying changes in the entire distribution of temperature to better predict biological performance and dispel the notion that raw or 'corrected' environmental (and specially air temperature) climatologies can be used to predict organismal temperature trends. Hence, despite their widespread coverage and availability, the severe limitations of environmental climatologies suggest that their role in conservation and management policy should be carefully considered.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Physiology
Conservation Physiology Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
71
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Conservation Physiology is an online only, fully open access journal published on behalf of the Society for Experimental Biology. Biodiversity across the globe faces a growing number of threats associated with human activities. Conservation Physiology will publish research on all taxa (microbes, plants and animals) focused on understanding and predicting how organisms, populations, ecosystems and natural resources respond to environmental change and stressors. Physiology is considered in the broadest possible terms to include functional and mechanistic responses at all scales. We also welcome research towards developing and refining strategies to rebuild populations, restore ecosystems, inform conservation policy, and manage living resources. We define conservation physiology broadly and encourage potential authors to contact the editorial team if they have any questions regarding the remit of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信