Explore the vast range of titles available.

Many species are already responding to global climate change by shifting their ranges to track suitable climatic conditions. However, habitat loss and fragmentation, coupled with the rapidity of climate change, make it difficult for species to keep pace. It is therefore unsurprising that enhancing landscape connectivity is the most frequently cited climate-adaptation strategy for conserving biodiversity. Yet most connectivity planning, even if intended to address climate change, does not directly take climate change and climate-driven range shifts into account. Nonetheless, several approaches that do explicitly address the unique challenges posed by climate change have recently emerged. We review these connectivity modeling approaches: specifically, how they incorporate species’ responses, identify movement routes, and address uncertainties. Despite this proliferation of approaches, conceptual and analytical hurdles remain, and meeting these challenges will be critical to achieving effective landscape connectivity for species in the face of climate change.

Conservation practitioners have long recognized ecological connectivity as a global priority for preserving biodiversity and ecosystem function. In the early years of conservation science, ecologists extended principles of island biogeography to assess connectivity based on source patch proximity and other metrics derived from binary maps of habitat. From 2006 to 2008, the late Brad McRae introduced circuit theory as an alternative approach to model gene flow and the dispersal or movement routes of organisms. He posited concepts and metrics from electrical circuit theory as a robust way to quantify movement across multiple possible paths in a landscape, not just a single least-cost path or corridor. Circuit theory offers many theoretical, conceptual, and practical linkages to conservation science. We reviewed 459 recent studies citing circuit theory or the open-source software Circuitscape. We focused on applications of circuit theory to the science and practice of connectivity conservation, including topics in landscape and population genetics, movement and dispersal paths of organisms, anthropogenic barriers to connectivity, fire behavior, water flow, and ecosystem services. Circuit theory is likely to have an effect on conservation science and practitioners through improved insights into landscape dynamics, animal movement, and habitat-use studies and through the development of new software tools for data analysis and visualization. The influence of circuit theory on conservation comes from the theoretical basis and elegance of the approach and the powerful collaborations and active user community that have emerged. Circuit theory provides a springboard for ecological understanding and will remain an important conservation tool for researchers and practitioners around the globe. Quienes practican la conservación han reconocido durante mucho tiempo que la conectividad ecológica es una prioridad mundial para la preservación de la biodiversidad y el funcionamiento del ecosistema. Durante los primeros años de la ciencia de la conservación los ecólogos difundieron los principios de la biografía de islas para evaluar la conectividad con base en la proximidad entre el origen y el fragmento, así como otras medidas derivadas de los mapas binarios de los hábitats. Entre 2006 y 2008 el fallecido Brad McRae introdujo la teoría de circuitos como una estrategia alternativa para modelar el flujo génico y la dispersión o las rutas de movimiento de los organismos. McRae propuso conceptos y medidas de la teoría de circuitos eléctricos como una manera robusta para cuantificar el movimiento a lo largo demúltiplescaminos posibles en un paisaje, no solamente a lo largo de un camino o corredor de menor costo. La teoría de circuitos ofrece muchos enlaces teóricos, conceptuales y prácticos con la ciencia de la conservación. Revisamos 459 estudios recientes que citan la teoría de circuitos o el software de fuente abierta Circuitscape. Nos enfocamos en las aplicaciones de la teoría de circuitos a la ciencia y a la práctica de la conservación de la conectividad, incluyendo temas como la genética poblacional y del paisaje, movimiento y caminos de dispersión de los organismos, barreras antropogénicas de la conectividad, comportamiento ante incendios, flujo del agua, y servicios ambientales. La teoría de circuitos probablemente tenga un efecto sobre la ciencia de la conservación y quienes la practican por medio de una percepción mejorada de las dinámicas del paisaje, el movimiento animal, y los estudios de uso de hábitat, y por medio del desarrollo de nuevas herramientas de software para el análisis de datos y su visualización. La influencia de la teoría de circuitos sobre la conservación viene de la base teórica y la elegancia de la estrategia y de las colaboraciones fuertes y la comunidad activa de usuarios que han surgido recientemente. La teoría de circuitos proporciona un trampolín para el entendimiento ecológico y seguirá siendo una importante herramienta de conservación para los investigadores y practicantes en todo el mundo. 保护实践者长期以来一直将生态连接度视为保护生物多祥性和生态系统功能的当务之急。在保护科学发 展早期，生态学家将岛屿生物地理学的原理进行扩展，基于源斑块邻近度和其它来_ ニ元生境图的指标来评估连 接度。2006 年到 2008 年，已故的 Brad McRae 引入了电路理论，作为模拟基因流和生物体扩散或移动路径的新 方法。他用电路理论中的概念和指标开发了一种稳健的方法来量化景观中多种可能的移动路径，而这不只是ー 条最低成本的路径或廊道。电路理论为保护科学提供了许多理论、概念和实践方面的联系。我们综述了近期引 用电路理论或是开源软件Circidtscape的459项研究，重点关注电路理论在连接度保护科学与实践中的应用，包 括景观和种群遗传学、生物体运动和扩散路径、连接度的人为障碍、火灾、水流和生态系统服务等间题。电路 理论通过帮助理解景观动力学、动物移动和生境利用研究，以及开发新的数据分析和可视化软件工具，影响着 保护科学和实践者。电路理论对保护的影响来自于该方法的理论基础和优雅性，以及现已出现的強大的合作队 伍和活跃的用户群体。电路理论为生态学理解提供了跳板，并将继续作为全球研究人员和实践者的重要保护エ 具。

Expanding the global protected area network is critical for addressing biodiversity declines and the climate crisis. However, how climate change will affect ecosystem representation within the protected area network remains unclear. Here we use spatial climate analogs to examine potential climate-driven shifts in terrestrial ecoregions and biomes under a +2 °C warming scenario and associated implications for achieving 30% area-based protection targets. We find that roughly half of land area will experience climate conditions that correspond with different ecoregions and nearly a quarter will experience climates from a different biome. Of the area projected to remain climatically stable, 46% is currently intact (low human modification). The area required to achieve protection targets in 87% of ecoregions exceeds the area that is intact, not protected, and projected to remain climatically stable within those ecoregions. Therefore, we propose that prioritization schemes will need to explicitly consider climate-driven changes in patterns of biodiversity.

On a warming planet, a key challenge natural resource managers face is protecting wildlife while mitigating climate change—as through forest carbon storage—to the greatest extent possible. But in some ecosystems, habitat restoration for imperiled species may be incompatible with maximizing carbon storage. For example, promoting early successional forest conditions does not maximize stand‐level carbon storage, whereas uniformly promoting high stocking or mature forest conditions in the name of carbon storage excludes species that require open or young stands. Here, we briefly review the literature regarding carbon and wildlife trade‐offs and then explore four case studies from the Northern Forest region of the United States. In each case, human activities have largely dampened the influence of natural disturbances; restoring or emulating these disturbances is typically required for habitat restoration even when doing so equates to less carbon storage at the stand level. We propose that applying a climate adaptation lens can help managers and planners navigate these trade‐offs and steer away from maladaptive practices that may ultimately reduce adaptive capacity. Instead, critically evaluating the consequences of stand‐level management actions on both carbon and wildlife can then facilitate landscape‐scale climate adaptation planning that supports a diversity of habitats alongside opportunities to invest in maximizing forest carbon.

Addressing how ecosystem services (ES) are distributed among groups of people is critical for making conservation and environmental policy-making more equitable. Here, we evaluate the distribution and equity of changes in ES benefits across demographic and socioeconomic groups in the United States (US) between 2020 and 2100. Specifically, we use land cover and population projections to model potential shifts in the supply, demand, and benefits of the following ES: provision of clean air, protection against a vector-borne disease (West Nile virus), and crop pollination. Across the US, changes in ES benefits are unevenly distributed among socioeconomic and demographic groups and among rural and urban communities, but are relatively uniform across geographic regions. In general, non-white, lower-income, and urban populations disproportionately bear the burden of declines in ES benefits. This is largely driven by the conversion of forests and wetlands to cropland and urban land cover in counties where these populations are expected to grow. In these locations, targeted land use policy interventions are required to avoid exacerbating inequalities already present in the US. Social inequalities may be reflected in how ecosystem services are distributed among groups of people. Here the authors estimate the distribution of three ecosystem services across demographic and socioeconomic groups in the US between 2020 and 2100, finding that non-white and lower-income groups disproportionately bear the loss of ecosystem service benefits.

Protected areas are essential to conserving biodiversity, yet changing climatic conditions challenge their efficacy. For example, novel and disappearing climates within the protected area network indicate that extant species may not have suitable climate in protected areas in the future. Further, potential transboundary range shifts, those that involve movement from one country to another, are also challenging because physical (e.g. fencing) and non-physical barriers (e.g. contrasting conservation policies) may impede climate-induced movements. Through the lens of climate analogs, we examined disappearing and novel climates within the global terrestrial protected area network and the potential for transboundary range shifts among protected areas under global warming 2 °C above preindustrial levels. We found that globally, climates in 24% of protected lands will no longer be protected within a 500 km radius of their focal location (indicating disappearing climates within the protected area network), while 36% of protected lands will gain climates not previously protected (indicating novel climates within the protected area network). Further, we found that potential transboundary range shifts are widespread but variable; for example, 23% of protected climates in Europe and >50% of protected climates in Africa under climate change are located in a different country than the focal protected areas. As the global conservation community actively deliberates conservation frameworks (e.g. 30% by 2030), our study offers insights to reduce the prevalence of novel and disappearing climates within the global protected area network via strategic conservation actions and underscores the importance of setting and accommodating targets and strategies that transcend national boundaries.

Unprecedented rates of climate change and biodiversity loss have galvanized efforts to expand protected areas (PAs) globally. However, limited spatial overlap between the most important landscapes for mitigating climate change and those with the highest value for biodiversity may impede efforts to simultaneously address both issues through new protections. At the same time, there is a need to understand how lands with high conservation value align with existing patterns of land management, both public and private, which will inform strategies for developing new conservation areas. To address these challenges, we developed three composite indices to identify the highest conservation value lands across the conterminous United States (CONUS) and Alaska, drawing on a suite of key ecological and environmental indicators. Two indices characterize the most important conservation lands for addressing climate change (based on climate accessibility, climate stability, and total carbon storage) and biodiversity (based on species richness, ecological integrity, and ecological connectivity), while a third, combined index simultaneously addresses both conservation challenges. We found that existing PAs in the United States have relatively low overlap with the highest conservation value lands, regardless of the index used (10%–13% in CONUS, 27%–34% in Alaska), suggesting limited effectiveness of current protections but substantial opportunity for expanding conservation into high‐value, unprotected areas. In unprotected landscapes, the highest value lands for addressing climate change generally diverged from those identified as most important for protecting biodiversity (22%–38% overlap, depending on index and geography). Our combined index reconciled these spatial trade‐offs through high overlap with both the climate and biodiversity indices (66%–72%). Of the unprotected high conservation value lands identified by each of our three indices, we found ≥70% are privately managed in CONUS, while 16%–27% are privately managed in Alaska, underscoring the need to engage private landowners and land trusts in efforts to substantially increase the total footprint of conservation lands in the United States. Our findings highlight the importance of balancing climate and biodiversity objectives when identifying new lands for conservation and provide guidance on where to target new protections to simultaneously address both goals. To facilitate planning using the indices, we developed an interactive web application.

Changing disturbance regimes and climate can overcome forest ecosystem resilience. Following high-severity fire, forest recovery may be compromised by lack of tree seed sources, warmer and drier postfire climate, or short-interval reburning. A potential outcome of the loss of resilience is the conversion of the prefire forest to a different forest type or nonforest vegetation. Conversion implies major, extensive, and enduring changes in dominant species, life forms, or functions, with impacts on ecosystem services. In the present article, we synthesize a growing body of evidence of fire-driven conversion and our understanding of its causes across western North America. We assess our capacity to predict conversion and highlight important uncertainties. Increasing forest vulnerability to changing fire activity and climate compels shifts in management approaches, and we propose key themes for applied research coproduced by scientists and managers to support decision-making in an era when the prefire forest may not return.

In response to mounting wildfire risks, land managers across the country will need to dramatically increase proactive wildfire management (e.g. fuel and forest health treatments). While human communities vary widely in their vulnerability to the impacts of fire, these discrepancies have rarely informed prioritizations for wildfire mitigation treatments. The ecological values and ecosystem services provided by forests have also typically been secondary considerations. To identify locations across the conterminous US where proactive wildfire management is likely to be effective at reducing wildfire severity and to yield co‐benefits for vulnerable communities and ecological values, we developed a set of spatial models that estimated wildfire mitigation potential (based on wildfire hazard and biophysical forest conditions) and either included or excluded information on vulnerable human communities, ecological values and ecosystem services. We then compared areas with high wildfire mitigation potential alone to refined ‘focal areas’ that overlaid social and ecological considerations to quantify the potential benefits of targeted wildfire mitigation treatments. Inclusion of social and ecological considerations substantially increased representation of vulnerable communities and ecological values in focal areas relative to the model that considered wildfire alone. For instance, restoration in these refined focal areas would cover 28% greater imperilled species richness, 45% greater water importance and 26% more families falling below the poverty line. By examining overlap between our refined focal areas and U.S. Forest Service top ranked firesheds (a prominent existing wildfire prioritization scheme), we show that our analysis can help to target wildfire mitigation efforts within firesheds to areas with particularly high social vulnerability and/or ecological value, providing an important compliment to a prioritization scheme based largely on risk to structures. Our results highlight the importance of considering ecological and social factors when implementing wildfire mitigation treatments and provide actionable guidance for integrating these considerations into existing prioritizations. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Background Concern is mounting that larger, stand-replacing forest fires may accelerate compositional shifts or conversions to non-forested states under a warming climate. Post-fire climatic conditions influence system trajectories by facilitating or hindering juvenile recruitment. But without an accurate, long-term understanding of where, when, and how climatic variability and other ecological factors affect regeneration, our ability to predict post-fire trajectories is limited. I quantified multiple, interacting facets of post-fire conifer regeneration—including annual establishment rates and growth—one decade after stand-replacing fire on the eastern slopes of the North Cascades, Washington, USA. Sites were stratified across topographic settings to specifically capture the potential for topography to moderate seasonal and interannual climatic conditions. Results Recruitment of juvenile conifers occurred every year since fire, with considerable species-specific variability across topographic settings and distance to seed source. Juveniles of all species, except lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm. ex S. Watson), were rarely observed when live, conspecific seed source was more than 75 m away. Lodgepole pine was the only species for which greater distance to live seed source was not associated with lower densities, a pattern attributable to serotiny. Annual establishment rates were strongly correlated with post-fire conditions: rates were highest when growing seasons were relatively cool and moist. A lagged climate signal was apparent in annual growth rates, but standardized climate–growth relationships did not vary across topographic settings, suggesting that topographic setting did not decouple site conditions from broader climatic trends to a degree that affected growth patterns. Conclusions These results underscore the importance of favorable post-fire climatic conditions in promoting robust establishment and growth while also highlighting the importance of topography and endogenous, stand-level processes ( e.g. , seed availability and delivery) in shaping recovery over time. Furthermore, these results suggest that, while the growing concern of post-fire regeneration failure may indeed be warranted under some conditions, failure is not yet the rule in all places and at all times. A more detailed understanding of recovery dynamics through long-term monitoring and by examining multiple, interacting facets of regeneration across scales will improve our predictions of where and when regeneration failure or, conversely, robust recovery may occur under a changing climate.