Back

Towards transboundary networks of climate-smart marine reserves in the Southern California Bight

Arafeh-Dalmau, N.; Munguia-Vega, A.; Micheli, F.; Vilalta-Navas, A.; Villasenor-Derbez, J. C.; Precoma-de la Mora, M.; Schoeman, D. S.; Medellin-Ortiz, A.; Cavanaugh, K. C.; Sosa-Nishizaki, O.; Burnham, T. L. U.; Knight, C. J.; Woodson, C. B.; Abas, M.; Abadia-Cardoso, A.; Aburto-Oropeza, O.; Esgro, M. W.; Espinosa-Andrade, N.; Beas-Luna, R.; Cardenas, N.; Carr, M. H.; Dale, K. E.; Cisneros-Soberanis, F.; Flores-Morales, A. L.; Fulton, S.; Garcia-Rodriguez, E.; Giron-Nava, A.; Gleason, M. G.; Green, A. L.; Hernandez-Velasco, A.; Ibarra-Macias, B.; Johnson, A. F.; Lorda, J.; Malpica-Cruz, L.; M

2022-01-05 ecology
10.1101/2022.01.04.475006 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Climate-smart conservation addresses the vulnerability of biodiversity to climate change impacts but may require transboundary considerations. Here, we adapt and refine 16 biophysical guidelines for climate-smart marine reserves for the transboundary California Bight ecoregion. We link several climate-adaptation strategies (e.g., maintaining connectivity, representing climate refugia, and forecasting effectiveness of protection) by focusing on kelp forests and associated species. We quantify transboundary larval connectivity along [~]800 km of coast and find that the number of connections and the average density of larvae dispersing through the network under future climate scenarios could decrease by [~]50%, highlighting the need to protect critical steppingstone nodes. We also find that although focal species will generally recover with 30% protection, marine heatwaves could hinder subsequent recovery in the following 50 years, suggesting that protecting climate refugia and expanding the coverage of marine reserves is a priority. Together, these findings provide a first comprehensive framework for integrating climate resilience for networks of marine reserves and highlight the need for a coordinated approach in the California Bight ecoregion.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Environmental Research Letters
○ 15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
25.4%
2
Nature Communications
○ 4913 papers in training set
Top 18%
10.0%
3
Communications Earth & Environment
○ 14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.0%
4
Global Change Biology
○ 69 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
5
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2130 papers in training set
Top 14%
4.8%
6
Science
● 429 papers in training set
Top 6%
4.8%
7
Conservation Letters
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
● 341 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
9
Conservation Biology
○ 14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.9%
10
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
● 51 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
11
eLife
● 5422 papers in training set
Top 36%
2.1%
12
Science of The Total Environment
○ 179 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
13
Nature Ecology & Evolution
○ 113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
14
Ecological Applications
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
15
Current Biology
○ 596 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.5%
16
Science Advances
● 1098 papers in training set
Top 20%
1.5%
17
Conservation Science and Practice
○ 13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
18
Global Ecology and Biogeography
○ 41 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
19
PLOS ONE
● 4510 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.9%
20
Journal of Applied Ecology
○ 35 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
21
Nature Human Behaviour
○ 85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
22
Ecography
○ 50 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
23
Scientific Data
○ 174 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
24
Cell Systems
○ 167 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.6%
25
Journal of Ecology
○ 47 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
26
Scientific Reports
○ 3102 papers in training set
Top 78%
0.6%
27
GeoHealth
● 10 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%
28
Patterns
○ 70 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%