4.8 Article

Impacts of changing rainfall regime on the demography of tropical birds

Journal

NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE
Volume 7, Issue 2, Pages 133-+

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE3183

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [IBN-0212587]
  2. US Department of Defense Legacy Resource Program
  3. US Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture [875-370]
  4. University of Illinois
  5. Environmental Science Program from the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biodiversity in tropical regions is particularly high and may be highly sensitive to climate change(1,2). Unfortunately, a lack of long-termdata hampers understanding of howtropical species, especially animals, may react to projected environmental changes. The amount and timing of rainfall is key to the function of tropical ecosystems and, although specific model predictions differ(3,4), there is general agreement that rainfall regimes will change over large areas of the tropics(5,6). Here, we estimate associations between dry season length (DSL) and the population biology of 20 bird species sampled in central Panama over a 33-year period. Longer dry seasons decreased the population growth rates and viability of nearly one-third of the species sampled. Simulations with modest increases in DSL suggest that consistently longer dry seasons will change the structure of tropical bird communities. Such changemay occur even without direct loss of habitat-afinding with fundamental implications for conservation planning. Systematic changes in rainfall regime may threaten some populations and communities of tropical animals even in large tracts of protected habitat. These findings suggest the need for collaboration between climate scientists and conservation biologists to identify areas where rainfall regimes will be able to plausibly maintain wildlife populations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available