Using climate extension to assist coastal decision-makers with climate adaptation

Coastal managers need accessible, trusted, tailored resources to help them interpret climate information, identify vulnerabilities, and apply climate information to decisions about adaptation on regional and local levels. For decades, climate scientists have studied the impacts that short term natural climate variability and long term climate change will have on coastal systems. For example, recent estimates based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warming scenarios suggest that global sea levels may rise 0.5 to 1.4 meters above 1990 levels by 2100 (Rahmstorf 2007; Grinsted, Moore, and Jevrejeva 2009). Many low-lying coastal ecosystems and communities will experience more frequent salt water intrusion events, more frequent coastal flooding, and accelerated erosion rates before they experience significant inundation. These changes will affect the ways coastal managers make decisions, such as timing surface and groundwater withdrawals, replacing infrastructure, and planning for changing land use on local and regional levels. Despite the advantages, managers’ use of scientific information about climate variability and change remains limited in environmental decision-making (Dow and Carbone 2007). Traditional methods scientists use to disseminate climate information, like peer-reviewed journal articles and presentations at conferences, are inappropriate to fill decision-makers’ needs for applying accessible, relevant climate information to decision-making. General guides that help managers scope out vulnerabilities and risks are becoming more common; for example, Snover et al. (2007) outlines a basic process for local and state governments to assess climate change vulnerability and preparedness. However, there are few tools available to support more specific decision-making needs. A recent survey of coastal managers in California suggests that boundary institutions can help to fill the gaps between climate science and coastal decision-making community (Tribbia and Moser 2008). The National Sea Grant College Program, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) university-based program for supporting research and outreach on coastal resource use and conservation, is one such institution working to bridge these gaps through outreach. Over 80% of Sea Grant’s 32 programs are addressing climate issues, and over 60% of programs increased their climate outreach programming between 2006 and 2008 (National Sea Grant Office 2008). One way that Sea Grant is working to assist coastal decision-makers with using climate information is by developing effective methods for coastal climate extension. The purpose of this paper is to discuss climate extension methodologies on regional scales, using the Carolinas Coastal Climate Outreach Initiative (CCCOI) as an example of Sea Grant’s growing capacities for climate outreach and extension. (PDF contains 3 pages)

Food conversion efficiency and the von Bertalanffy growth function. Part II and conclusion: Extension of the new model to the generalized von Bertalanffy growth function

The simple model relating food conversion efficiency (K sub(1)) to body weight derived from the theoretical concepts behind von Bertalanffy's growth model, is extended here in the context of Pauly's generalization of that model. The exponent, which was fixed to 1/3 in the simple model, is in the extended model equivalent to 1-d, with d being the weight exponent of the anabolism term in Pauly's growth model. This makes the model applicable to fish for which the assumptions of the original (special) version of von Bertalanffy's growth model are violated.

Pacific Salmon, Oncorhynchus spp., and the Definition of "Species" Under the Endangered Species Act

For purposes ofthe Endangered Species Act (ESA), a "species" is defined to include "any distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature. "Federal agencies charged with carrying out the provisions of the ESA have struggled for over a decade to develop a consistent approach for interpreting the term "distinct population segment." This paper outlines such an approach and explains in some detail how it can be applied to ESA evaluations of anadromous Pacific salmonids. The following definition is proposed: A population (or group of populations) will be considered "distinct" (and hence a "species ")for purposes of the ESA if it represents an evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) of the biological species. A population must satisfy two criteria to be considered an ESU: 1) It must be substantially reproductively isolated from other conspecific population units, and 2) It must represent an important component in the evolutionary legacy of the species. Isolation does not have to be absolute, but it must be strong enough to permit evolutionarily important differences to accrue in different population units. The second criterion would be met if the population contributes substantially to the ecological/genetic diversity of the species as a whole. Insights into the extent of reproductive isolation can be provided by movements of tagged fish, natural recolonization rates observed in other populations, measurements of genetic differences between populations, and evaluations of the efficacy of natural barriers. Each of these methods has its limitations. Identification of physical barriers to genetic exchange can help define the geographic extent of distinct populations, but reliance on physical features alone can be misleading in the absence of supporting biological information. Physical tags provide information about the movements of individual fish but not the genetic consequences of migration. Furthermore, measurements ofc urrent straying or recolonization rates provide no direct information about the magnitude or consistency of such rates in the past. In this respect, data from protein electrophoresis or DNA analyses can be very useful because they reflect levels of gene flow that have occurred over evolutionary time scales. The best strategy is to use all available lines of evidence for or against reproductive isolation, recognizing the limitations of each and taking advantage of the often complementary nature of the different types of information. If available evidence indicates significant reproductive isolation, the next step is to determine whether the population in question is of substantial ecological/genetic importance to the species as a whole. In other words, if the population became extinct, would this event represent a significant loss to the ecological/genetic diversity of thes pecies? In making this determination, the following questions are relevant: 1) Is the population genetically distinct from other conspecific populations? 2) Does the population occupy unusual or distinctive habitat? 3) Does the population show evidence of unusual or distinctive adaptation to its environment? Several types of information are useful in addressing these questions. Again, the strengths and limitations of each should be kept in mind in making the evaluation. Phenotypic/life-history traits such as size, fecundity, and age and time of spawning may reflect local adaptations of evolutionary importance, but interpretation of these traits is complicated by their sensitivity to environmental conditions. Data from protein electrophoresis or DNA analyses provide valuable insight into theprocessofgenetic differentiation among populations but little direct information regarding the extent of adaptive genetic differences. Habitat differences suggest the possibility for local adaptations but do not prove that such adaptations exist. The framework suggested here provides a focal point for accomplishing the majorgoal of the Act-to conserve the genetic diversity of species and the ecosystems they inhabit. At the same time, it allows discretion in the listing of populations by requiring that they represent units of real evolutionary significance to the species. Further, this framework provides a means of addressing several issues of particular concern for Pacific salmon, including anadromous/nonanadromous population segments, differences in run-timing, groups of populations, introduced populations, and the role of hatchery fish.