Explore the vast range of titles available.

Human footprint models allow visualization of human spatial pressure across the globe. Up until now, Antarctica has been omitted from global footprint models, due possibly to the lack of a permanent human population and poor accessibility to necessary datasets. Yet Antarctic ecosystems face increasing cumulative impacts from the expanding tourism industry and national Antarctic operator activities, the management of which could be improved with footprint assessment tools. Moreover, Antarctic ecosystem dynamics could be modelled to incorporate human drivers. Here we present the first model of estimated human footprint across predominantly ice-free areas of Antarctica. To facilitate integration into global models, the Antarctic model was created using methodologies applied elsewhere with land use, density and accessibility features incorporated. Results showed that human pressure is clustered predominantly in the Antarctic Peninsula, southern Victoria Land and several areas of East Antarctica. To demonstrate the practical application of the footprint model, it was used to investigate the potential threat to Antarctica's avifauna by local human activities. Relative footprint values were recorded for all 204 of Antarctica's Important Bird Areas (IBAs) identified by BirdLife International and the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR). Results indicated that formal protection of avifauna under the Antarctic Treaty System has been unsystematic and is lacking for penguin and flying bird species in some of the IBAs most vulnerable to human activity and impact. More generally, it is hoped that use of this human footprint model may help Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting policy makers in their decision making concerning avifauna protection and other issues including cumulative impacts, environmental monitoring, non-native species and terrestrial area protection.

Protection of Antarctica's biodiversity and ecosystem values is enshrined in the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, which provides for the designation of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) to areas with outstanding values. Concern has been raised that existing ASPAs fail to prioritize areas to maximize the likelihood of ensuring the long-term conservation of Antarctic ecosystems and biodiversity. The absence of systematic and representative protection is particularly acute for inland aquatic ecosystems, which support a disproportionate amount of inland biodiversity. This paper promotes the case for overt inclusion of inland waters as a critical component of a representative protected area framework for Antarctica, thereby addressing their current underrepresentation. We set out a structured approach to enable the selection of representative freshwater systems for inclusion in the ASPA framework that, with modification, could also be applied across other Antarctic habitats. We acknowledge an overall lack of information on the biogeography of inland aquatic diversity and recommend increased use of remote data collection along with classification tools to mitigate this, as well as the need for the consideration of catchment-scale processes. Changes that accompany contemporary and anticipated climate change make the need for the conservation of representative biodiversity increasingly urgent.

The Southern Ocean supports ecosystem services that are important on a global scale. Climate change and human activities (tourism, fishing, and research) will affect both the demand for, and the provision of, these services into the future. Here we synthesize recent assessments of the current status and expected future climate-driven changes in Southern Ocean ecosystems and evaluate the potential consequences of these changes for the provision of ecosystem services. We explore in detail three key services (the ‘blue carbon’ pathway, the Antarctic krill fishery, and Antarctic tourism), tracing the consequences of climate change from physical drivers through biological impacts to the benefits to humans. We consider potential non-climatic drivers of change, current and future demands for the services, and the main global and regional policy frameworks that could be used to manage risks to the provision of these services in a changing climate. We also develop a formal representation of the network of interactions between the suite of potential drivers and the suite of services, providing a framework to capture the complexity of this network and its embedded feedback loops. Increased consideration of the linkages and feedbacks between drivers and ecosystem services will be required to underpin robust management responses into the future.

There is increasing evidence that fossil-fuel burning, and consequential global heating of 1.1°C to date, has led to the increased occurrence and severity of extreme environmental events. It is well documented how such events have impacted society outside Antarctica through enhanced levels of rainfall and flooding, heatwaves and wildfires, drought and water/food shortages and episodes of intense cooling. Here, we briefly examine evidence for extreme events in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean across a variety of environments and timescales. We show how vulnerable natural Antarctic systems are to extreme events and highlight how governance and environmental protection of the continent must take them into account. Given future additional heating of at least 0.4°C is now unavoidable (to contain heating to the “Paris Agreement 1.5°C” scenario), and may indeed be higher unless drastic action is successfully taken on reducing greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by mid-Century, we explain it is virtually certain that future Antarctic extreme events will be more pronounced than those observed to date.

Antarctica has been subject to direct human activity for a little over 200 years. In recent decades, the combination of sharp increases in human activity and regional climate change, particularly around the Antarctic Peninsula and Scotia Arc, have placed the terrestrial and freshwater environment under increased threat of non-native species introduction and establishment. Policymakers, including those on the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting’s Committee for Environmental Protection, need accurate and up-to-date information on the presence and status of non-native species within Antarctica upon which to base their decision-making. Here we collate available information to consider the status of known non-native species in the terrestrial Antarctic, and how this has changed in the past decade. Of known establishments, we found 46% to have been deliberately introduced during historical transplant experiments and subsequently removed, 36% were non-experimental introductions, and 18% only survive(d) synanthropically (i.e., associated with Antarctic facilities). All non-native species currently established in the natural Antarctic environment are located in either the Antarctic Peninsula, South Shetland Islands or South Orkney Islands (i.e., the maritime Antarctic region, with none in the continental Antarctic), with invertebrate species dominating. Most of the currently established non-native species have now been present for more than a decade, though the more recent appearance of non-native flies in station sewage treatment plants and their expansion into the Antarctic environment is a major cause for concern. While there has been some success in eradicating introduced plants, management of introduced invertebrates in the natural environment has largely not been attempted. Considerable scope exists for the Antarctic Treaty Parties to better coordinate non-native species management across the invasion continuum.

Antarctic and Southern Ocean environments are facing increasing pressure from multiple threats. The Antarctic Treaty System regularly looks to the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) for the provision of independent and objective advice based on the best available science to support decision-making, policy development and effective environmental management. The recently approved SCAR Scientific Research Programme Ant-ICON - ‘Integrated Science to Inform Antarctic and Southern Ocean Conservation‘ - facilitates and coordinates high-quality transdisciplinary research to inform the conservation and management of Antarctica, the Southern Ocean and the sub-Antarctic in the context of current and future impacts. The work of Ant-ICON focuses on three research themes examining 1) the current state and future projections of Antarctic systems, species and functions, 2) human impacts and sustainability and 3) socio-ecological approaches to Antarctic and Southern Ocean conservation, and one synthesis theme that seeks to facilitate the provision of timely scientific advice to support effective Antarctic conservation. Research outputs will address the most pressing environmental challenges facing Antarctica and offer high-quality science to policy and advisory bodies including the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, the Committee for Environmental Protection and the Scientific Committee of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources.

To date, Antarctica is the only continent to have escaped the COVID-19 pandemic. This was facilitated by the continent's isolation and low human presence, combined with the global emergence of the pandemic at the end of the Antarctic summer season and the rapid action of those national governmental operators and other actors still active on and around the continent during the early phases of the outbreak. Here, we consider the implications of the pandemic for Antarctic governance, national operator logistics, science, tourism and the fishing industry, as well as for Antarctic environmental protection. Global disruption will result in a temporary decrease in human activity in Antarctica, in turn leading to a reduction in environmental impacts for a period, but also a reduced capacity to respond to environmental incidents. Given the diversity of transmission routes and vectors, preventing the introduction of the virus will be difficult, even with stringent quarantine procedures in place, and the risks and implications of virus transmission to Antarctic wildlife are largely unknown. With control of the pandemic a major global challenge, international cooperation will be essential if Antarctica is to remain free of coronavirus.

Intensive human exploitation of the Antarctic fur seal (Arctocephalus gazella) in its primary population centre on sub-Antarctic South Georgia, as well as on other sub-Antarctic islands and parts of the South Shetland Islands, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries rapidly brought populations to the brink of extinction. The species has now recovered throughout its original distribution. Non-breeding and yearling seals, almost entirely males, from the South Georgia population now disperse in the summer months far more widely and in higher numbers than there is evidence for taking place in the pre-exploitation era. Large numbers now haul out in coastal terrestrial habitats in the South Orkney Islands and also along the north-east and west coast of the Antarctic Peninsula to at least Marguerite Bay. In these previously less- or non-visited areas, the seals cause levels of damage likely never to have been experienced previously to fragile terrestrial habitats through trampling and over-fertilisation, as well as eutrophication of sensitive freshwater ecosystems. This increased area of summer impact is likely to have further synergies with aspects of regional climate change, including reduction in extent and duration of sea ice permitting seals access farther south, and changes in krill abundance and distribution. The extent and conservation value of terrestrial habitats and biodiversity now threatened by fur seal distribution expansion, and the multiple anthropogenic factors acting in synergy both historically and to the present day, present a new and as yet unaddressed challenge to the agencies charged with ensuring the protection and conservation of Antarctica’s unique ecosystems.

Antarctic microbial biodiversity is the result of a balance between evolution, extinction and colonization, and so it is not possible to gain a full understanding of the microbial biodiversity of a location, its biogeography, stability or evolutionary relationships without some understanding of the input of new biodiversity from the aerial environment. In addition, it is important to know whether the microorganisms already present are transient or resident - this is particularly true for the Antarctic environment, as selective pressures for survival in the air are similar to those that make microorganisms suitable for Antarctic colonization. The source of potential airborne colonists is widespread, as they may originate from plant surfaces, animals, water surfaces or soils and even from bacteria replicating within the clouds. On a global scale, transport of air masses from the well-mixed boundary layer to high-altitude sites has frequently been observed, particularly in the warm season, and these air masses contain microorganisms. Indeed, it has become evident that much of the microbial life within remote environments is transported by air currents. In this review, we examine the behaviour of microorganisms in the Antarctic aerial environment and the extent to which these microorganisms might influence Antarctic microbial biodiversity.

Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties are entitled to participate in consensus-based governance of the continent through the annual Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings. To acquire consultative status, an interested Party must demonstrate \"substantial research activity,\" but no agreed mechanism exists to determine whether a Party has fulfilled this criterion. Parties have generally demonstrated substantial research activity with the construction of a research station, as suggested within the Treaty itself. However, this largely demonstrates logistical capacity, rather than research activity, and often results in major and persistent impacts on Antarctic terrestrial environments. Our study found that national investment in Antarctic infrastructure, estimated by the number of bed spaces at stations, was not a reliable indicator of scientific output. Therefore, we investigated metrics to evaluate research activity directly, and identified both the overall number of Antarctic papers and the proportion of national scientific output these represented as meaningful metrics. Such metrics could (1) demonstrate a nation's level of research activity in Antarctica or (2) help Consultative Parties assess the level of research activity undertaken by a Party seeking to acquire consultative status. Our data showed that, even without land-based Antarctic infrastructure, Canada, Denmark and Switzerland may have reasonable grounds to demonstrate \"substantial research activity\" on a level comparable with existing Consultative Parties. The use of these metrics may help dispel any perceived requirement for the establishment of a research station to reach consultative status, by putting a greater emphasis on generation of scientific research outputs rather than construction of Antarctic infrastructure.