Plan
Comptes Rendus

Avertissement : cette traduction du texte intégral est mise à la disposition du public dans le but d'élargir la diffusion scientifique de l'article original, mais n'a été vérifiée ni par les auteurs (à moins que leurs noms figurent parmi ceux des auteurs de la traduction) ni par l'équipe éditoriale de la revue. Cette version n'engage pas la responsabilité scientifique des éditeurs. La version originale reste la seule version scientifique de référence.

Climate change and the biosphere
Titre original : Changement climatique et biosphère
Article du numéro thématique : Facing climate change, the range of possibilities

Résumé

Climate change has become the third cause of biodiversity loss behind the exploitation of natural environments by humans and direct exploitation (food, health, raw materials). It could become the primary cause of biodiversity loss by the next century. Climate change has modified the biological rhythms and distributions of species, the functioning of ecosystems, trophic chains, biogeochemical cycles, and ecosystem services. The projections that we are able to provide of the future evolution of the biosphere show an amplification of the phenomena observed the last fifty years. Species have very limited ways to adapt given the speed at which climate change occurs. This is why, beyond reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it is also necessary to reduce the other anthropogenic pressures on the biosphere.

Métadonnées de la traduction
Traduction mise en ligne le :
DOI : 10.5802/crgeos.22-en
Keywords: Biodiversity, Species distribution, Extreme weather, Extinctions, Biological rhythm, Ecosystem functioning
Licence : CC-BY 4.0
Droits d'auteur : Les auteurs conservent leurs droits
@article{CRGEOS_2020__352_4-5_339_0,
     author = {Isabelle Chuine},
     title = {Changement climatique et biosph\`ere},
     journal = {Comptes Rendus. G\'eoscience},
     pages = {339--354},
     publisher = {Acad\'emie des sciences, Paris},
     volume = {352},
     number = {4-5},
     year = {2020},
     doi = {10.5802/crgeos.22},
     language = {fr},
}
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Isabelle Chuine
TI  - Changement climatique et biosphère
JO  - Comptes Rendus. Géoscience
PY  - 2020
SP  - 339
EP  - 354
VL  - 352
IS  - 4-5
PB  - Académie des sciences, Paris
DO  - 10.5802/crgeos.22
LA  - fr
ID  - CRGEOS_2020__352_4-5_339_0
ER  - 
%0 Journal Article
%A Isabelle Chuine
%T Changement climatique et biosphère
%J Comptes Rendus. Géoscience
%D 2020
%P 339-354
%V 352
%N 4-5
%I Académie des sciences, Paris
%R 10.5802/crgeos.22
%G fr
%F CRGEOS_2020__352_4-5_339_0
Romain Dziegielinski.  Climate change and the biosphere (2023) doi : 10.5802/crgeos.22-en (Isabelle Chuine. Changement climatique et biosphère. Comptes Rendus. Géoscience, Volume 352 (2020) no. 4-5, pp. 339-354. doi : 10.5802/crgeos.22)

Traduction du texte intégral (Proposez une traduction dans une autre langue)

Texte intégral traduit par :

1. The services the biosphere provides to humanity are deteriorating as it loses its biodiversity

For this article, I wanted to use the term biosphere rather than biodiversity or ecosphere for the following reasons: the term biosphere, first introduced by geologist Eduard Suess in 1885 [Suess 1885], represents all living organisms and the environments in which they live. It therefore includes both the notion of biodiversity, which represents the diversity of living organisms, including its taxonomic diversity and its genetic diversity; and that of an ecosystem, which represents a community of living beings that interact with each other and with their environment. The terms ecosystem and biodiversity appeared decades later (1935 and 1986 respectively) and gradually supplanted the term biosphere, probably for convenience in public debates, allowing a more precise discussion of the various environmental issues humanity is facing (ecosystem services, endangered species, genetic resources, etc.). The equivalent of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) for the biosphere is the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Most of the examples I will cite in this article will concern the terrestrial environment. For a more specific overview of the marine environment see for example Gattuso et al. [2018], Hoegh-Guldberg and Bruno [2010].

The biosphere provides a very large number of services to humanity, which could be described as vital, as its health, food and well-being depend on it. There are generally four main types of services provided to humans by the biosphere: provisioning services (food, water, raw material, energy), regulating services (air quality, soil fertility, flood and epidemic control, etc.), cultural services (cultural identities, aesthetic and spiritual values, source of artistic and scientific inspiration), and supporting services which are the basis of all ecosystems and their services (favourable habitats for animal and plant species participating in ecosystem services and preservation of their diversity).

Most of the services provided to humans by the biosphere have only deteriorated over the last fifty years, and in particular the services of pollination, genetic resources, disease vector regulation, and soil fertility [Díaz et al. 2019]. The deterioration of these services is largely due to the fact that the biosphere loses its biodiversity, in terms of the number of species and ecosystems, and genetic diversity [Díaz et al. 2019; Oliver et al. 2015a]. The rate of species extinction is currently at least ten times higher than it has been in the last ten million years and it is only increasing [Díaz et al. 2019]. This loss of diversity affects species both wild and domesticated by humans [Díaz et al. 2019; FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture 2019]. This rapid decline in biodiversity means that most of the goals of international agreements on the environment and human well-being (Aichi Targets of the Convention on Biodiversity, United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 2030) will not be achieved on the basis of current trajectories [Díaz et al. 2019]. This decline will also undermine the goals specified in the Paris Agreement adopted at COP21 (21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change).

2. Climate change is currently the third leading cause of biodiversity loss

The current primary causes of biodiversity loss are the destruction of natural habitats by human activities, direct exploitation for food, health and the creation of material goods, and climate change, which ranks third ahead of pollution and biological invasions [Díaz et al. 2019]. Climate change is currently exacerbating the effects of other human pressures on the biosphere and has become the major cause of changes in the biosphere in recent decades [Field et al. 2014]. These changes are mainly a modification of the development cycles of living beings, which has major consequences on their growth, survival and reproduction, a modification of the geographical ranges of species, and a modification of the exchanges of water, gas and energy fluxes between the biosphere and the atmosphere [Pecl et al. 2017].

Climate change is changing the course of the annual development cycle of both plant and animal species, including so-called "poikilotherms" animals that do not regulate their body temperature (for example reptiles, amphibians, fish, insects, crustaceans, molluscs) [Cleland et al. 2007; Menzel 2003; Parmesan and Yohe 2003]. The dates of appearance, during the year, of the various events that punctuate the annual development cycle of these species, such as the appearance of new leaves or flowers in plants, the hatching of eggs, etc., are very closely dependent on the weather conditions that prevailed several weeks or even months before the appearance of these events [Bronson 2009; Chuine and Régnière 2017]. Global warming advanced the resumption of activity of living beings in spring by two to three days per decade, and delayed the end of their activity in autumn by one to two days per decade (Figure 1) (Menzel et al. 2006; Parmesan and Yohe 2003; Walther et al. 2005). However, while observed trends have been linear so far, recent studies show that since the 1990s, earliness trends in spring have slowed in plants [Fu et al. 2015]. This slowing down of the earliness trends of the resumption of activity of plants in spring is thought to be due to winter warming [Asse et al. 2018], as predicted by the models [Chuine et al. 2016; Morin et al. 2009; Vitasse et al. 2011] and experimental results [Morin et al. 2010]. Indeed, perennial plants need a certain number of cold days during the winter to stop the dormancy of their buds and to flower (floral initiation) [Anderson et al. 2010; Campoy et al. 2011]. This winter dormancy, which corresponds to a state of physiological inactivity regulated by internal factors, is an adaptation of extratropical plants to survive the bad season (winter in our latitudes) whose temperature conditions are not compatible with cellular activity. It is thanks to this adaptation in particular that the plants can withstand frost during this period. If the consequences of this lack of winter cold are for the moment a slowing down of spring earliness, the models predict that this lack of cold will cause in a few years a delay in the resumption of activity of the vegetation then in a few decades an impossibility to resume this activity normally [Chuine et al. 2016].

 

Figure 1.

Illustration of the effect of climate change on the development cycles of living beings. Blue: winter rest period, green: period of activity and growth; orange: period of preparation for winter rest. During the winter resting period, most plants and tree buds are dormant, many animals are in diapause, wintering or hibernation: physiological activity is reduced to a minimum. Activity resumes in spring, and earlier than before (15 to 30 days depending on the species since the 1950s). The end of the activity period that allows preparation for the winter rest period comes in autumn and a little later than before (8 to 15 days depending on the species since the 1950s). These shifts in development cycles during the year resulted in damage to vegetation, particularly fruit crops, which are linked to late frosts, as young leaves emerge from the buds before the last spring frosts. They have also caused an increase in water scarcity during the summer as vegetation draws water from the soil earlier and longer than before. Finally, the cycle of each species is modified in a certain way and differently from other species, so that the cycles that were synchronised, as is often the case in trophic chains, are no longer synchronised, and many species are thus deprived of their main food resource.

 

These changes in the annual development cycle of living beings have many cascading consequences, some positive but many negative. In perennial plants, these changes are reflected in a lengthening of the growth period [Menzel and Fabian 1999], partly responsible for the increase in forest productivity until the early 2000s [Delpierre et al. 2009; Myneni et al. 1997; Piao et al. 2007]. On the other hand, in annual plants, the annual growth cycle is shortened because development is accelerated. This shortening of the annual cycle results in a decrease in the amount of flowers and seeds produced, even when water supply conditions are optimal, as this generally depends on the growth that may have occurred prior to flowering [Asseng et al. 2011; Ferris et al. 1998; Wardlaw and Wrigley 1994; Wheeler et al. 1996]. Changes in the annual developmental cycle of living organisms also have other consequences such as an increase in late frost damage as vegetation begins to grow before the arrival of the last spring frost (Figure 1) [Lenz et al. 2013; Vitasse et al. 2018], which in recent years has led to significant crop losses for wine and fruit growers. The lengthening period of activity also results in an increase in water scarcity, as vegetation depletes soil water supplies faster, as it begins to draw water earlier and for longer (for perennial species, including trees) (Figure 1) (Carnicer et al. 2011; Jump et al. 2017). This phenomenon occurs in some areas already facing increased and repeated summer droughts due to decreased precipitation and increased evapotranspiration due to increased temperature [IPCC 2013; Sheffield et al. 2012].

These changes in the development cycles of living organisms also impact interactions between species, in particular within trophic chains in which the prey-predator, host-parasite, plant-pollinator or even plant-herbivore relationships are determined by the stage of development of each of the interacting species (see for review Renner and Zohner, 2018). For example, the caterpillar stage of a butterfly species that feeds exclusively on young leaves must be perfectly synchronous with the young leaf stage for the survival of this butterfly species (Figure 1). However, the development cycles are not modified in the same way in the different species because they are not equally sensitive to temperature (Figure 2). Cycles are out of sync and food chains are breaking [Renner and Zohner 2018]. Consequently, beyond a modification of the trophic interaction networks [Gilman et al. 2010; Walther 2010], these desynchronisations of cycles between species will also cause species extinction [Cahill et al. 2013]. It is estimated that on average out of ten trophic chains, six species could disappear as a result of this desynchronisation [Koh et al. 2004].

 

Figure 2.

Variation in species performance with temperature. The performance here represents both that of a physiological process, as well as the growth, survival or fertility of a species. The performance curves can take various forms but all show a thermal optimum, and decrease sharply when the temperature is too low or too high. The thermal optimum is generally variable between species, between individuals of the same species and also between physiological processes. Temperature response curves can generally vary to some extent in the very short term due to acclimation processes within the same genotype/individual, and in the longer term due to genetic adaptation in a species/population. The living beings can tolerate leaving their optimal thermal zone but for a time all the more limited as they are far from the optimum. Adapted from Figure TS 3.A of the [IPCC 2014] WG 2 report.

 

The second major impact of climate change on the biosphere, which is partly a consequence of the first, is species range shift [Parmesan and Yohe 2003; Walther et al. 2002]. The species move up to the mountain tops [Lenoir et al. 2008; Morueta-holme et al. 2015], and towards the poles [Beaugrand et al. 2003; Brommer et al. 2012; Hickling et al. 2006], such as the processionary caterpillar that moves up towards the North of France at an average speed of 5.5 km/year and towards summits at a speed of 5 m/year [Battisti et al. 2005]. These species movements occur at variable rates depending on their migration capacity. Sessile organisms such as plants are able to migrate at a maximum speed ranging from a few meters to thirty kilometers per decade, depending on the characteristics of their seeds which determine their dispersing agents (gravity, wind, water, animals). In comparison, large mammals, winged insects and pelagic marine organisms can migrate hundreds or even thousands of kilometres per decade. These range shifts also result in local extinctions of species in the warm margins of the ranges of many species [Parmesan and Yohe 2003; Walther 2003]. The species that live in areas limited to polar regions and subalpine levels are particularly vulnerable because their habitat is inexorably shrinking [Callaghan et al. 2004; Engler et al. 2011], as are endemic species that have very restricted ranges. [Dirnböck 2011; Malcolm et al. 2006].

One of the fundamental reasons for all these effects of climate change on living organisms is that their physiological activity can only take place within a fairly narrow temperature range, of only a few tens of degrees (Figure 2). The performance of living organisms is zero when the temperature becomes too low or too high and they are optimal at an intermediate temperature level. Although it is not yet clear why the effectiveness of biological processes at the cell, organ or organism level varies so much with temperature, the effect of temperature on molecular structures probably plays an important role [Schulte 2015]. For example, regarding the development of plants in extratropical environments, we know that most of them need cold temperatures to break seed and bud dormancy, and to flower, indicating that the bad winter season has passed, and that growth can resume [Anderson et al. 2010; Campoy et al. 2011]. We also know that once this dormancy ends, the warmer the weather, the faster the cell growth is, until reaching a thermal optimum that can vary between 20 and 30 °C depending on the species [Anderson et al. 2010]. Beyond this optimum, growth performance decreases even under conditions of optimal hydration until reaching a lethal thermal threshold beyond which proteins and nucleic acids are denatured and cellular membranes disorganised, causing irreparable cellular damage and death of the organism. Poikilothermic animals (which do not regulate their body temperature) also depend on external conditions for their development. The rates of embryonic and larval development depend on outdoor temperature in a relationship presenting an optimum [Cossins and Bowler 1987; Gillooly et al. 2002] (Figure 2). Each temperature-dependent biological process has its own thermal optimum that varies between species and between individuals of the same species. The aggregation of all these processes allowing organisms to live and reproduce results in a relationship of survival and fecundity rates to temperature which also has a thermal optimum and which varies between species and between individuals.

We are currently very far from knowing what are the thermal optima and lethal thermal thresholds of all species. Nevertheless, it must be noted that these lethal thermal thresholds are increasingly being reached. For example, it appears that the functioning of vegetation is being severely compromised in many parts of the world due to recurring heat waves and droughts that regularly break records [Field et al. 2014]. When conditions become too dry and too hot, vegetation will initially change from a carbon sink to a carbon source because it will breathe more than it photosynthesises. [Bonan 2008; Chapin et al. 2008]. And if these conditions become too frequent or too intense, it will then wither and die [Carnicer et al. 2011; Jump et al. 2017]. Water availability is just as crucial to cell function, if not more so, than temperature conditions. Cell growth requires in plants a certain level of cell hydration and during a dry episode, it is one of the biological processes that will stop first [Cosgrove 1986; Lempereur et al. 2016]. However, the availability of water is also greatly affected by climate change, on the one hand, because the precipitation regime has changed in many regions (a clear decrease in the South of France for example); and on the other hand, because the increase in temperature increases soil evaporation and vegetation perspiration. Beyond water availability issues, the June 2019 heat wave revealed that even under no water scarcity conditions, high temperatures could cause significant damage to vegetation. This heat wave has caused unprecedented damage to the foliage of many species, including Mediterranean species particularly resistant to high heat and drought such as the holm oak (Figure 3). Although the causes of this damage have not yet been analysed, the hypothesis put forward is that they are due to the exceptional earliness of the heat wave for which the plants were not prepared, many of which have not yet completed the installation of the various protective structures of their leaves, such as the cuticle.

 

Figure 3.

Photographs of holm oak leaves on the day after the heat wave of 29 June 2019 at the CNRS experimental site in Puéchabon (Hérault). The leaves turned white in a few hours before turning brown after a few days. The holm oak is a Mediterranean species adapted to heat waves and droughts. The damage caused by the heat wave of June 2019 is unprecedented and probably due to the exceptional earliness of the heat wave which arrived before the leaves had completed their development and in particular the building of protective structures such as the cuticle. Photos: Jean-Marc Limousin and Jean-Marc Ourcival, CNRS.

 

3. The effects of climate change on the biosphere have consequences for human well-being and activities, ecosystem services, and the climate itself

Beyond the consequences for the species themselves, the effects of climate change on the biosphere also have consequences for ecosystem services, human well-being and the climate itself.

The biosphere is affected by changes in the atmosphere, but the atmosphere is also impacted by the biosphere in many ways. Terrestrial vegetation is an important component of the climate system [Chapin et al. 2008; Marland et al. 2003]. It exchanges energy fluxes with the atmosphere, water and gas as well, mainly carbon dioxide and oxygen [Bonan 2008; Chapin et al. 2008]. These fluxes involve many physical, biochemical and physiological processes with complex regulatory patterns and feedback loops. Any change in vegetation or its functioning therefore leads to changes in these fluxes which affect surface temperature, air humidity, albedo, but also carbon stocks [Bonan 2008; Chapin et al. 2008]. For example, the increase in the abundance of woody vegetation in the Arctic tundra due to climate change decreases the surface albedo, and, as a result, the surface energy budget and ultimately the surface temperature, thus amplifying the already more pronounced warming at high latitudes [Chapin 2005]. This amplification effect adds to that of the reduction of the snow surface at high latitudes, which also reduces the surface albedo.

Warming and increasing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide cause an increase in photosynthetic activity of plants that consumes carbon dioxide and produce oxygen. But warming also increases the respiration of plants, which therefore consume more oxygen [Grace and Rayment 2000; Ryan 1991]. The net carbon balance can therefore vary greatly from region to region depending on climatic conditions. It is positive in regions that still receive sufficient precipitation, but it is becoming increasingly negative in regions subject to increasingly long and intense droughts [Allard et al. 2005]. This is due to the fact that most plants can no longer photosynthesise when they lack water. Indeed, the plant absorbs carbon dioxide from the air by opening structures called stomata, generally arranged on the lower face of the leaves, but when open, the stomata also release oxygen (produced by photosynthesis) and water. These complex interactions between climatic conditions and vegetation functioning are extremely important to consider in our assessment of the role of vegetation, and in particular forests, in climate change mitigation [Richardson et al. 2010; Wood et al. 2012]. Consequently, the effects of climate change on the functioning of vegetation have both positive and negative effects on the climate itself, and it is necessary to have a comprehensive understanding of the many interactions involved to implement nature-based climate change mitigation solutions.

Climate change is profoundly changing one of the most essential ecosystem services for humans, which is the supply service (food, raw materials, drinking water and medicines). This effect occurs through range shifts of species, in particular marine species (fisheries resources); but also through the performance of species, in particular those exploited by humans, in terms of growth and reproduction, i.e. productivity for humans. The impact of climate change on field crops has so far been rather negative with declining yields, especially for wheat, rice and maize, which are the three largest crops in the world (http://www.fao.org/) [Field et al. 2014; Lobell et al. 2011; Schlenker and Roberts 2009]. These decreases in efficiency are due in part to the acceleration and shortening of the annual development cycle mentioned above. In this specific case of cultivated plants (but this also applies to domesticated animals), the loss of genetic diversity due to the reduction in the number of cultivated varieties, to keep only the most productive and the most attractive for marketing [FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture 2019; Wolff 2004], now hinders the selection of varieties better adapted to new climatic conditions [Wolkovich et al. 2018] and alter the ability of agroecosystems to withstand climatic hazards [Forest et al. 2015] and natural hazards such as pests and pathogens [Ekroth et al. 2019; White et al. 2020]. Indeed, taxonomic diversity and genetic diversity generally make plant and animal communities more resilient to hazards. [Oliver et al. 2015b]. This resilience is generally the result of redundancy and complementarity between different species, varieties, and genotypes, in the exploitation of resources (water, light, nutrients), and in the capacities of defense against pests and pathogens, and resistance to climatic hazards [Allan et al. 2011; Downing et al. 2014]. Taxonomic diversity and genetic diversity can also slow down the genetic adaptation of pests and pathogens to their hosts in the long term [White et al. 2020]. The use of positive interactions between species, varieties/breeds and genotypes is one of the fundamental principles of agroecology.

The effects of redistribution of species on the Earth's surface, resulting from climate change, on ecosystem functioning and community recomposition are less well documented and understood. Nevertheless, we know that this redistribution of species disrupts trophic chains in the same way as the modification of the annual development cycles mentioned above. For example, the recent arrival of the king crab, a formidable predator of echinoderms and molluscs, on the Antarctic seabed, which was previously inaccessible to crustaceans because the water temperature was too low, has profoundly altered the balance of this ecosystem, which has probably remained unchanged for millions of years [Aronson et al. 2015].

Finally, species range shifts due to climate change can also affect human well-being and health. For example, climate change is causing a range shift of many pathogen vectors, such as the anopheles mosquito, whose range is increasing as a result of climate change. As this species is a vector of malaria, the population exposed to malaria is increasing [Siraj et al. 2014].

4. Climate change is likely to become the leading cause of biodiversity loss and the means of adaptation are limited

Model projections predict that the negative effects of climate change on biodiversity will increase, in some cases exponentially [Bellard et al. 2012; Díaz et al. 2019]. Although extinction events will mostly be local (disappearance of a species from a region), the total extinction rate will also increase [Bellard et al. 2012; Thomas et al. 2004]. Even for global warming limited to 2°C, the models predict that the range of the majority of terrestrial species will decrease significantly, and that 5% of species will be at risk of total extinction, this number would increase to 16% with a warming of 4°C [Díaz et al. 2019]. Models also predict considerable changes in the functioning of ecosystems and their nature, even for a warming of 3°C in boreal regions and of 4°C in temperate regions [Heyder et al. 2011]. They also predict a sharp increase in forest decline in the temperate-boreal zone [Heyder et al. 2011]. Finally, they predict that marine environments will be as affected as terrestrial environments with an increase in the extinction rates of species in subpolar, tropical, and semi-enclosed seas, and a 60% turnover of local biodiversity that will affect the services provided to humans by marine ecosystems [Cheung et al. 2009]. Under these conditions, the capacity of protected areas to conserve endangered species will be greatly affected [Díaz et al. 2019; Monzón et al. 2011].

However, most projections do not take into account the adaptive capacity of species to climate change, as very few models are currently capable of doing so. The ways in which species adapt to climate change are essentially threefold: migration, phenotypic plasticity and genetic adaptation [Aitken et al. 2008; Davis and Shaw 2001; Lavorel et al. 2017]. Species can escape climate change by moving to territories whose climate remains or becomes favourable to their survival and reproduction, and thus escape total extinction (Figure 4). But if we compare the velocity of climate change to the velocity of species, we realise that many species cannot migrate as fast as the climate, especially plants (Figure 4). For example, the velocity of climate change under the RCP 8.5 scenario is greater than seventy kilometers per decade whereas the maximum known velocities of migration in plants are of the order of thirty kilometers per decade, when average velocities are one to two kilometers per decade [Field et al. 2014]. Thus, without assisted migration of individuals or propagules (e.g. seeds) by humans, many species will be at risk of total extinction before they have been able to escape from areas that will no longer ensure their survival. However, human-assisted migration has a significant cost and can only be implemented for a very limited number of species. Apart from conservation programmes for endangered species, assisted migration is currently being tested in forestry on species of economic interest [Aitken and Bemmels 2016].

 

Figure 4.

Impacts of climate change on species ranges. A. Projection of the potential range of beech in 2100 based on the A1Fi climate scenario and the PHENOFIT range model. Red: area where climatic conditions will no longer ensure the survival of the species, yellow and green: area where climatic conditions allow the survival of the species (green: more favourable conditions than before; yellow: less favorable conditions than before), blue: area where the climate allows the survival of the species and from which species was previously absent. Illustration adapted from Saltré et al. [2015]. B. Maximum speed at which species can migrate and climate velocity under different scenarios. Figure adapted from Figure SPM5 of the IPCC Working Group 2 report [Field et al. 2014].

 

Another way in which species adapt to climate change is through so-called phenotypic plasticity, where this is adaptive [Merilä and Hendry 2014]. Adaptive phenotypic plasticity is the ability to maintain a certain level of performance when conditions change, thanks to a modification of gene expression (Figure 3). For example, the growth rate of buds in the spring changes with temperature, and sprouting comes ever earlier as springs get warmer. But this plasticity is not always adaptive. Using models capable of describing the plasticity of the date of budburst, as well as the relationship between the date of budburst and tree performance, Duputié et al. [2015] showed that under future climatic conditions, the plasticity of the date of budburst will be very mostly advantageous in oak and will help this species to maintain itself to some extent under new climatic conditions, whereas it will be disadvantageous in Scots pine which risks disappearing from a large part of Western Europe because plasticity will have reached its limits in this species.

Finally, the ultimate adaptation to climate change is genetic evolution under the effect of natural selection brought about by climate change itself. Climate change is putting very strong selection pressure on living beings. Evidence of this is the existence of local genetic adaptations in wide-ranging organisms and high gene flow (which instead tend to genetically homogenise populations) [Alberto et al. 2013]. There is growing scientific evidence of genetic evolution under climate change [Merilä and Hendry 2014]. One of the easiest examples to understand is the change in daylength inducing winter diapause (a temporary state of greatly reduced physiological and metabolic activity) in the mosquito. In five years, the daylength inducing diapause in this mosquito has decreased by one hour in response to climate change, allowing the mosquito to continue its activity longer in autumn than before [Bradshaw and Holzapfel 2008]. This genetic change in mosquito sensitivity to the length of daylight to enter diapause is explained by the fact that warmer temperatures in autumn allow the mosquito to continue its activity and reproduction, and therefore it becomes advantageous to enter diapause later. Consequently, genes present in mosquito populations that induced diapause later than other genes present by responding to a shorter duration of the day were selected and propagated in the populations. But the mosquito has an extremely short generation time. It is able to produce several generations a year. Natural selection is therefore very effective in this species because the selection operates several times a year. Natural selection will also be more effective if genetic diversity in populations is high and population sizes are large. But not all species meet these conditions. Many species have very long generation times, such as many large mammals and trees. Furthermore, genetic diversity is often low in rare species [Gitzendanner and Soltis 2000] and has tended to decrease overall in human domesticated species [FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture 2019] [Wolff 2004] and species whose habitat area has been greatly reduced by human activities [Allentoft and Brien 2010]. Our ability to predict how quickly species will successfully adapt genetically to climate change is currently very weak as we are still far from understanding the genetic basis underlying the evolutionary responses to climate change (but see [Gauzere et al. 2020]). However, humans have two means at their disposal to accelerate natural selection in natural populations: to increase genetic diversity in populations by carrying out assisted gene flow, and to increase the areas of species' habitats in order to increase population sizes, for example by restoring degraded habitats or by increasing the areas of protected areas. These interventions, such as assisted migration, have significant costs. Nevertheless, the second lever of action, i.e. to increase the areas of the species' habitats, is already part of certain recommendations relating to the Sustainable Development Goals that France has ratified, and it will undoubtedly be the most efficient and the most sustainable.

5. Conclusion

Climate change profoundly affects the biosphere in many ways, as climatic conditions determine the performance of living organisms, their ability to reproduce and survive. These changes in the performance of living organisms consequently alter the functioning of ecosystems, the range of species, and biodiversity. Climate change is currently the third leading cause of biodiversity loss and risks becoming the first in the short term. The means of adaptation to climate change are limited for many species. As a result, beyond the necessary drastic reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to limit global warming, it is also necessary to take strong action on other causes of biodiversity loss and to implement nature-based solutions. Nature-based solutions are actions aimed at protecting, sustainably managing and restoring natural or modified ecosystems to directly address societal challenges in an effective and adaptive manner, while ensuring human well-being and producing benefits for biodiversity [IUCN 2018]. Only these solutions will restore and maintain the ecological and evolutionary processes that will enable species to cope effectively and sustainably with climate change. In addition, measures to mitigate climate change and protect nature can be synergistic (e.g. halting deforestation, reforestation in a reasoned manner, improving soil health, agricultural practices, etc.).


Bibliographie

[Aitken and Bemmels, 2016] S. N. Aitken; J. B. Bemmels Time to get moving : assisted gene flow of forest trees, Evol. Appl., Volume 9 (2016) no. 1, pp. 271-290 | DOI

[Aitken et al., 2008] S. N. Aitken; S. Yeaman; J. A. Holliday; T. L. Wang; S. Curtis-McLane Adaptation, migration or extirpation : climate change outcomes for tree populations, Evol. Appl., Volume 1 (2008), pp. 95-111 | DOI

[Alberto et al., 2013] F. J. Alberto; S. N. Aitken; R. Alía; S. C. González-Martínez; H. Hänninen; A. Kremer; F. Lefèvre; T. Lenormand; S. Yeaman; R. Whetten; O. Savolainen Potential for evolutionary responses to climate change - evidence from tree populations, Glob. Change Biol., Volume 19 (2013), pp. 1645-1661 | DOI

[Allan et al., 2011] E. Allan; W. Weisser; A. Weigelt; C. Roscher; M. Fischer; H. Hillebrand More diverse plant communities have higher functioning over time due to turnover in complementary dominant species, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, Volume 108 (2011), pp. 17034-17039 | DOI

[Allard et al., 2005] V. Allard; M. Aubinet; N. Buchmann; P. Ciais; M. Reichstein; N. Viovy; A. Granier; J. Oge Europe-wide reduction in primary productivity caused by the heat and drought in 2003, Nature, Volume 437 (2005), pp. 529-533

[Allentoft and Brien, 2010] M. E. Allentoft; J. O. Brien Global amphibian declines, loss of genetic diversity and fitness : a review, Diversity, Volume 2 (2010), pp. 47-71 | DOI

[Anderson et al., 2010] J. V Anderson; D. P. Horvath; W. S. Chao; M. E. Foley Bud dormancy in perennial plants : a mechanism for survival, Dormancy and Resistance in Harsh Environments (E. Lubzens; M. Clark, eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2010 | DOI

[Aronson et al., 2015] R. B. Aronson; K. E. Smith; S. C. Vos; J. B. Mcclintock; M. O. Amsler; P. Moksnes; D. S. Ellis; J. Kaeli; H. Singh; J. W. Bailey; J. C. Schiferl; R. Van Woesik; M. A. Martin; B. V Steffel; M. E. Deal; S. M. Lazarus No barrier to emergence of bathyal king crabs on the Antarctic shelf, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, Volume 112 (2015) no. 42, pp. 12997-13002 | DOI

[Asse et al., 2018] D. Asse; I. Chuine; Y. Vitasse; N. G. Yoccoz; N. Delpierre; V. Badeau; A. Delestrade; C. F. Randin Warmer winters reduce the advance of tree spring phenology induced by warmer springs in the Alps, Agric. Meteorol., Volume 252 (2018), pp. 220-230 | DOI

[Asseng et al., 2011] S. Asseng; I. Foster; N. C. Turner The impact of temperature variability on wheat yields, Glob. Change Biol., Volume 17 (2011), pp. 997-1012 | DOI

[Battisti et al., 2005] A. Battisti; M. Stastny; S. Netherer; C. Robinet; A. Schopf; A. Roques; S. Larsson Expansion of geographic range in the pine processionary moth caused by increased winter temperatures, Ecol. Appl., Volume 15 (2005), pp. 2084-2096 | DOI

[Beaugrand et al., 2003] G. Beaugrand; K. M. Brander; J. Alistair Lindley; S. Souissi; P. C. Reid Plankton effect on cod recruitment in the North Sea, Nature, Volume 426 (2003), pp. 661-664 | DOI

[Bellard et al., 2012] C. Bellard; C. Bertelsmeier; P. Leadley; W. Thuiller; F. Courchamp Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity, Ecol. Lett., Volume 15 (2012), pp. 365-377 | DOI

[Bonan, 2008] G. B. Bonan Forests and climate change : forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests, Science, Volume 320 (2008) no. 80, pp. 1444-1449 | DOI

[Bradshaw and Holzapfel, 2008] W. E. Bradshaw; C. M. Holzapfel Genetic response to rapid climate change : it’s seasonal timing that matters, Mol. Ecol., Volume 17 (2008), pp. 157-166 | DOI

[Brommer et al., 2012] J. E. Brommer; A. Lehikoinen; J. Valkama The breeding ranges of Central European and Arctic bird species move poleward, PLoS One, Volume 7 (2012), pp. 1-7 | DOI

[Bronson, 2009] F. H. Bronson Climate change and seasonal reproduction in mammals, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, Volume 364 (2009), pp. 3331-3340 | DOI

[Bélanger and Pilling, 2019] The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture (J. Bélanger; D. Pilling, eds.), FAO, 2019

[Cahill et al., 2013] A. E. Cahill; M. E. Aiello-Lammens; M. Caitlin Fisher-Reid; X. Hua; C. J. Karanewsky; H. Y. Ryu; G. C. Sbeglia; F. Spagnolo; J. B. Waldron; O. Warsi; J. J. Wiens How does climate change cause extinction ?, Proc. R. Soc. B, Volume 280 (2013), 20121890 | DOI

[Callaghan et al., 2004] T. V Callaghan; L. O. Björn; Y. Chernov; T. Chapin; T. R. Christensen; B. Huntley; R. A. Ims; M. Johansson; D. Jolly; S. Jonasson; N. Matveyeva; N. Panikov; W. Oechel; G. Shaver; J. Elster; H. Henttonen; K. Laine; K. Taulavuori; E. Taulavuori; C. Zöckler Biodiversity, distributions and adaptations of arctic species in the context of environmental change, AMBIO A J. Hum. Environ., Volume 33 (2004), pp. 404-417 | DOI

[Campoy et al., 2011] J. A. Campoy; D. Ruiz; J. Egea Dormancy in temperate fruit trees in a global warming context : a review, Sci. Hortic., Volume 130 (2011), pp. 357-372 (Amsterdam) | DOI

[Carnicer et al., 2011] J. Carnicer; M. Coll; M. Ninyerola; X. Pons; G. Sánchez; J. Peñuelas Widespread crown condition decline, food web disruption, and amplified tree mortality with increased climate change-type drought, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, Volume 108 (2011), pp. 1474-1478 | DOI

[Chapin et al., 2008] F. S. Chapin; J. T. Randerson; A. D. McGuire; J. A. Foley; C. B. Field Changing feedbacks in the climate-biosphere system, Front. Ecol. Environ., Volume 6 (2008), pp. 313-320 | DOI

[Chapin, 2005] F. S. Chapin Role of land-surface changes in Arctic summer warming, Science, Volume 310 (2005) no. 80, pp. 657-660 | DOI

[Cheung et al., 2009] W. W. L. Cheung; V. W. Y. Lam; J. L. Sarmiento; K. Kearney; R. Watson; D. Pauly Projecting global marine biodiversity impacts under climate change scenarios, Fish Fish., Volume 10 (2009), pp. 235-251 | DOI

[Chuine and Régnière, 2017] I. Chuine; J. Régnière Process-based models of phenology for plants and animals, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., Volume 48 (2017), pp. 159-182 | DOI

[Chuine et al., 2016] I. Chuine; M. Bonhomme; J. M. J.-M. Legave; I. García de Cortázar-Atauri; G. Charrier; A. Lacointe; T. Améglio; I. Garcia de Cortazar-Atauri; G. Charrier; A. Lacointe; T. Améglio; C. Universit Can phenological models predict tree phenology accurately in the future ? The unrevealed hurdle of endodormancy break, Glob. Change Biol., Volume 22 (2016), pp. 3444-3460 | DOI

[Cleland et al., 2007] E. E. Cleland; I. Chuine; A. Menzel; H. A. Mooney; M. D. Schwartz; D. Schwartz Shifting plant phenology in response to global change, Trends Ecol. Evol., Volume 22 (2007), pp. 357-365 | DOI

[Cosgrove, 1986] D. Cosgrove Biophysical control of plant cell growth, Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol., Volume 37 (1986), p. 377-340 | DOI

[Cossins and Bowler, 1987] A. H. Cossins; K. Bowler Temperature Biology of Animals, Chapman and Hall, London, UK, 1987 | DOI

[Davis and Shaw, 2001] M. B. Davis; R. G. Shaw Range shifts and adaptive responses to Quaternary climate change, Science, Volume 292 (2001), pp. 673-679 | DOI

[Delpierre et al., 2009] N. Delpierre; K. Soudani; C. Francois; B. Kostner; J. Y. Pontailler; E. Nikinmaa; L. Misson; M. Aubinet; C. Bernhofer; A. Granier; T. Grunwald; B. Heinesch; B. Longdoz; J. M. Ourcival; S. Rambal; T. Vesala; E. Dufrene Exceptional carbon uptake in European forests during the warm spring of 2007 : a data-model analysis, Glob. Change Biol., Volume 15 (2009), pp. 1455-1474 | DOI

[Dirnböck et al., 2011] T. Dirnböck; F. Essl; W. Rabitsch Disproportional risk for habitat loss of high-altitude endemic species under climate change, Glob. Change Biol., Volume 17 (2011), pp. 990-996 | DOI

[Downing et al., 2014] A. L. Downing; B. Brown; M. A. Leibold Multiple diversity – stability mechanisms enhance population and community stability in aquatic food webs, Ecology, Volume 95 (2014), pp. 173-184 | DOI

[Duputié et al., 2015] A. Duputié; A. Rutschmann; O. Ronce; I. Chuine Phenological plasticity will not help all species adapt to climate change, Glob. Change Biol., Volume 21 (2015), pp. 3062-3073 | DOI

[Díaz et al., 2019] S. Díaz; J. Settele; E. S. Brondízio; H. T. Ngo; J. Agard; A. Arneth; P. Balvanera; K. A. Brauman; S. H. M. Butchart; K. M. A. Chan; A. G. Lucas; K. Ichii; J. Liu; S. M. Subramanian; G. F. Midgley; P. Miloslavich; Z. Molnár; D. Obura; A. Pfaff; S. Polasky; A. Purvis; J. Razzaque; B. Reyers; R. R. Chowdhury; Y. J. Shin; I. Visseren-Hamakers; K. J. Willis; C. N. Zayas Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change, Science, Volume 366 (2019) no. 80 | DOI

[Ekroth et al., 2019] A. K. E. Ekroth; C. Rafaluk-Mohr; K. C. King Host genetic diversity limits parasite success beyond agricultural systems : a meta-analysis., Proc. R. Soc. B, Volume 286 (2019), 20191811

[Engler et al., 2011] R. Engler; C. F. Randin; W. Thuiller; S. Dullinger; N. E. Zimmermann; M. B. Araújo; P. B. Pearman; G. Le Lay; C. Piedallu; C. H. Albert; P. Choler; G. Coldea; X. De Lamo; T. Dirnböck; J. C. Gégout; D. Gómez-García; J. A. Grytnes; E. Heegaard; F. Høistad; D. Nogués-Bravo; S. Normand; M. Puşcaş; M. T. Sebastià; A. Stanisci; J. P. Theurillat; M. R. Trivedi; P. Vittoz; A. Guisan 21st century climate change threatens mountain flora unequally across Europe, Glob. Change Biol., Volume 17 (2011), pp. 2330-2341 | DOI

[Ferris et al., 1998] R. Ferris; R. H. Ellis; T. R. Wheeler; P. Hadley Effect of high temperature stress at anthesis on grain yield and biomass of field-grown crops of wheat, Ann. Bot., Volume 82 (1998), pp. 631-639 | DOI

[Field et al., 2014] C. B. Field; V. R. Barros; K. J. Mach; M. D. Mastrandrea; M. Aalst; W. N. van Adger; D. J. Arent; J. Barnett; R. Betts; E. Al Technical Summary, Climate Change 2014 : Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A : Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (C. B. Field; V. R. Barros; D. J. Dokken; K. J. Mach; M. D. Mastrandrea; T. E. Bilir; M. Chatterjee; K. L. Ebi; Y. O. Estrada; R. C. Genova; B. Girma; E. S. Kissel; A. N. Levy; S. MacCracken; P. R. Mastrandrea; L. L. White, eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2014, pp. 35-94

[Forest et al., 2015] I. Forest; D. Craven; J. Connolly; M. Loreau; B. Schmid; C. Beierkuhnlein; T. M. Bezemer; C. Bonin; H. Bruelheide; E. Luca; A. De Ebeling; J. N. Griffin; Q. Guo; Y. Hautier; E. Al Biodiversity increases the resistance of ecosystem productivity to climate extremes, Nature, Volume 526 (2015), pp. 574-578

[France, 2018] UICN. France Les solutions fondées sur la Nature pour lutter contre les changements climatiques et réduire les risques naturels en France. Paris, France, UICN. France, 2018

[Fu et al., 2015] Y. H. Fu; H. Zhao; S. Piao; M. Peaucelle; S. Peng; G. Zhou; P. Ciais; Y. Song; Y. Vitasse; Z. Zeng; I. A. Janssens; M. Huang; A. Menzel; J. Pen Declining global warming effects on the phenology of spring leaf unfolding, Nature, Volume 256 (2015), pp. 104-107 | DOI

[Gattuso et al., 2018] J. P. Gattuso; A. K. Magnan; L. Bopp; W. W. L. Cheung; C. M. Duarte; J. Hinkel; E. Mcleod; F. Micheli; A. Oschlies; P. Williamson; R. Billé; V. I. Chalastani; R. D. Gates; J. O. Irisson; J. J. Middelburg; H. O. Pörtner; G. H. Rau Ocean solutions to address climate change and its effects on marine ecosystems, Front. Mar. Sci., Volume 5 (2018), p. 337 | DOI

[Gauzere et al., 2020] J. Gauzere; B. Teuf; H. Davi; L. Chevin; T. Caignard; S. Delzon; I. Chuine Where is the optimum ? Predicting the variation of selection along climatic gradients and the adaptive value of plasticity. A case study on tree phenology, Evol. Lett., Volume 4 (2020) no. 2, pp. 109-123 | DOI

[Gillooly et al., 2002] J. F. Gillooly; E. L. Charnov; G. B. West; V. M. Savage; J. H. Brown Effects of size and temperature on developmental time, Nature, Volume 417 (2002), pp. 70-73 | DOI

[Gilman et al., 2010] S. E. Gilman; M. C. Urban; J. Tewksbury; G. W. Gilchrist; R. D. Holt A framework for community interactions under climate change, Trends Ecol. Evol., Volume 25 (2010), pp. 325-331 | DOI

[Gitzendanner and Soltis, 2000] M. Gitzendanner; P. Soltis Patterns of genetic variation in rare and widespread plant congeners, Am. J. Bot., Volume 87 (2000), pp. 783-792 | DOI

[Grace and Rayment, 2000] J. Grace; M. Rayment Respiration in the balance, Nature, Volume 404 (2000), pp. 819-820 | DOI

[Heyder et al., 2011] U. Heyder; S. Schaphoff; D. Gerten Risk of severe climate change impact on, Environ. Res. Lett., Volume 6 (2011), 034036 | DOI

[Hickling et al., 2006] R. Hickling; D. B. Roy; J. K. Hill; R. Fox; C. D. Thomas The distributions of a wide range of taxonomic groups are expanding polewards, Glob. Change Biol., Volume 12 (2006), pp. 450-455 | DOI

[Hoegh-Guldberg and Bruno, 2010] O. Hoegh-Guldberg; J. F. Bruno The impact of climate change on the world’s marine ecosystems, Science, Volume 328 (2010) no. 80, pp. 1523-1528 | DOI

[IPCC, 2013] IPCC Working Group I contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. Climate Change 2013 : The Physical Science Basis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2013

[IPCC, 2014] IPCC Working Group II contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change 2014 : Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A : Global and Sectoral Aspects., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2014

[Jump et al., 2017] A. S. Jump; P. Ruiz-benito; C. D. Allen; T. Kitzberger; R. O. D. Fensham Structural overshoot of tree growth with climate variability and the global spectrum of drought-induced forest dieback, Glob. Chang. Biol., Volume 23 (2017), pp. 3742-3757 | DOI

[Koh et al., 2004] L. P. Koh; R. R. Dunn; N. S. Sodhi; R. K. Colwell; H. C. Proctor; V. S. Smith Species coextinctions and the biodiversity crisis, Science, Volume 305 (2004) no. 80, pp. 1632-1634 | DOI

[Lavorel et al., 2017] S. Lavorel; D. Lebreton; Y. L. Maho Les mécanismes d’adaptation de la biodiversité aux changements climatiques et leurs limites, Rapport de l’Académie des Sciences, Institut de France, Paris, 2017, pp. 1-157

[Lempereur et al., 2016] M. Lempereur; J.-M. Limousin; F. Guibal; J. M. Ourcival; S. Rambal; J. Ruffault; F. Mouillot Recent climate hiatus revealed dual control by temperature and drought on the stem growth of Mediterranean Quercus ilex, Glob. Chang. Biol., Volume 23 (2016) no. 1, pp. 42-55 | DOI

[Lenoir et al., 2008] J. Lenoir; J. C. Gégout; P. A. Marquet; P. De Ruffray; H. Brisse A significant upward shift in plant species optimum elevation during the 20th century, Science, Volume 320 (2008) no. 80, pp. 1768-1771 | DOI

[Lenz et al., 2013] A. Lenz; G. Hoch; Y. Vitasse; C. Körner European deciduous trees exhibit similar safety margins against damage by spring freeze events along elevational gradients, New Phytol., Volume 200 (2013), pp. 1166-1175 | DOI

[Lobell et al., 2011] D. B. Lobell; W. Schlenker; J. Costa-Roberts Climate trends and global crop production since 1980, Science, Volume 333 (2011) no. 80, pp. 616-621 | DOI

[Malcolm et al., 2006] J. R. Malcolm; C. Liu; R. P. Neilson; L. Hansen; L. Hannah Global warming and extinctions of endemic species from biodiversity hotspots, Conserv. Biol., Volume 20 (2006), pp. 538-548 | DOI

[Marland et al., 2003] G. Marland; R. A. Pielke; M. Apps; R. Avissar; R. A. Betts; K. J. Davis; P. C. Frumhoff; S. T. Jackson; L. A. Joyce; P. Kauppi; J. Katzenberger; K. G. MacDicken; R. P. Neilson; J. O. Niles; D. Niyogi; S. Dutta; R. J. Norby; N. Pena; N. Sampson; Y. Xue The climatic impacts of land surface change and carbon management, and the implications for climate-change mitigation policy, Clim. Policy, Volume 3 (2003), pp. 149-157 | DOI

[Menzel and Fabian, 1999] A. Menzel; P. Fabian Growing season extended in Europe, Nature, Volume 397 (1999), p. 659 | DOI

[Menzel et al., 2006] A. Menzel; T. H. Sparks; N. Estrella; E. Koch; A. Aaasa; R. Ahas; K. Alm-Kübler; P. Bissolli; O. Braslavská; A. Briede; F. M. Chmielewski; Z. Crepinsek; Y. Curnel; Å. Dahl; C. Defila; A. Donnelly; Y. Filella; K. Jatczak; F. Måge; A. Mestre; Ø. Nordli; J. Peñuelas; P. Pirinen; V. Remišová; H. Scheifinger; M. Striz; A. Susnik; A. J. H. Van Vliet; F. E. Wielgolaski; S. Zach; A. Zust European phenological response to climate change matches the warming pattern, Glob. Change Biol., Volume 12 (2006), pp. 1969-1976 | DOI

[Menzel, 2003] A. Menzel Plant phenological ‘Fingerprints’, Phenology : An Integrative Environmental Science (M. D. Schwartz, ed.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2003, pp. 319-330

[Merilä and Hendry, 2014] J. Merilä; A. P. Hendry Climate change, adaptation, and phenotypic plasticity : the problem and the evidence, Evol. Appl., Volume 7 (2014), pp. 1-14 | DOI

[Monzón et al., 2011] J. Monzón; L. Moyer-Horner; M. B. Palamar Climate change and species range dynamics in protected areas, Bioscience, Volume 61 (2011), pp. 752-761 | DOI

[Morin et al., 2009] X. Morin; M. J. Lechowicz; C. Augspurger; J. O’keefe; D. Viner; I. Chuine Leaf phenology in 22 North American tree species during the 21st century, Gob. Change Biol., Volume 15 (2009), pp. 961-975 | DOI

[Morin et al., 2010] X. Morin; J. Roy; L. Sonie; I. Chuine Changes in leaf phenology of three European oak species in response to experimental climate change, New Phytol., Volume 186 (2010), pp. 900-910 | DOI

[Morueta-holme et al., 2015] N. Morueta-holme; K. Engemann; P. Sandoval-acuña; J. D. Jonas; R. M. Segnitz Strong upslope shifts in Chimborazo’s vegetation over two centuries since Humboldt, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Volume 112 (2015) no. 41, pp. 12741-12745 | DOI

[Myneni et al., 1997] R. B. Myneni; C. D. Keeling; C. J. Tucker; G. Asrar; R. R. Nemani Increasing plant growth in the northern high latitudes from 1981 to 1991, Nature, Volume 386 (1997), pp. 698-702 | DOI

[Oliver et al., 2015a] T. H. Oliver; M. S. Heard; N. J. B. Isaac; D. B. Roy; D. Procter; F. Eigenbrod; R. Freckleton; A. Hector; C. D. L. Orme; O. L. Petchey; V. Proença; D. Raffaelli; K. B. Suttle; G. M. Mace; B. Martín-lópez; B. A. Woodcock; J. M. Bullock Biodiversity and resilience of ecosystem functions, Trends Ecol. Evol., Volume 30 (2015), pp. 673-684 | DOI

[Oliver et al., 2015b] T. H. Oliver; N. J. B. Isaac; T. A. August; B. A. Woodcock; D. B. Roy; J. M. Bullock Declining resilience of ecosystem functions under biodiversity loss, Nat. Commun., Volume 6 (2015), 10122 | DOI

[Parmesan and Yohe, 2003] C. Parmesan; G. Yohe A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems, Nature, Volume 421 (2003), pp. 37-42 | DOI

[Pecl et al., 2017] G. Pecl; M. B. Araujo; J. D. Bell; J. Blanchard; T. C. Bonebrake; G. T. Pecl; M. B. Araujo; J. Bell Biodiversity redistribution under climate change : impacts on ecosystems and human well-being, Science, Volume 355 (2017) no. 80, pp. 1-9

[Piao et al., 2007] S. Piao; P. Friedlingstein; P. Ciais; N. Viovy; J. Demarty Growing season extension and its impact on terrestrial carbon cycle in the Northern Hemisphere over the past 2 decades, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, Volume 21 (2007), pp. 1-11 | DOI

[Renner and Zohner, 2018] S. S. Renner; C. M. Zohner Climate change and phenological mismatch in trophic interactions among plants, insects, and vertebrates, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., Volume 49 (2018), pp. 165-182 | DOI

[Richardson et al., 2010] A. D. Richardson; T. A. Black; P. Ciais; N. Delbart; M. A. Friedl; N. Gobron; D. Y. Hollinger; W. L. Kutsch; B. Longdoz; S. Luyssaert; M. Migliavacca; L. Montagnani; J. W. Munger; E. Moors; S. L. Piao; C. Rebmann; M. Reichstein; N. Saigusa; E. Tomelleri; R. Vargas; A. Varlagin Influence of spring and autumn phenological transitions on forest ecosystem productivity, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B, Volume 365 (2010), pp. 3227-3246 | DOI

[Ryan, 1991] M. G. Ryan Effects of climate change on plant respiration, Ecological Applications, Volume 1 (1991), pp. 157-167 | DOI

[Saltré et al., 2015] F. Saltré; A. Duputié; C. Gaucherel; I. Chuine How climate, migration ability and habitat fragmentation affect the projected future distribution of European beech, Glob. Chang. Biol., Volume 21 (2015) no. 2, pp. 897-910 | DOI

[Schlenker and Roberts, 2009] W. Schlenker; M. J. Roberts Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe damages to U.S. crop yields under climate change, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Volume 106 (2009), pp. 15594-15598 | DOI

[Schulte, 2015] P. M. Schulte The effects of temperature on aerobic metabolism : towards a mechanistic understanding of the responses of ectotherms to a changing environment, J. Exp. Biol., Volume 218 (2015), pp. 1856-1866 | DOI

[Sheffield et al., 2012] J. Sheffield; E. F. Wood; M. L. Roderick Little change in global drought over the past 60 years, Nature, Volume 491 (2012), pp. 435-438 | DOI

[Siraj et al., 2014] A. S. Siraj; M. Santos-Vega; M. J. Bouma; D. Yadeta; D. R. Carrascal; M. Pascual Altitudinal Changes in Malaria Incidence in Highlands of Ethiopia and Colombia, Science, Volume 343 (2014) no. 80, pp. 1154-1158 | DOI

[Suess, 1885] E. Suess Das Antlitz der Erde, Vol I, G. Freytag, Leipzig, Germany, 1885

[Thomas et al., 2004] C. D. Thomas; A. Cameron; R. E. Green; M. Bakkenes; L. J. Beaumont; Y. C. Collingham; B. F. N. Erasmus; M. F. de Siqueira; A. Grainger; L. Hannah; L. Hughes; B. Huntley; A. S. van Jaarsveld; G. F. Midgley; L. Miles; M. A. Ortega-Huerta; A. T. Peterson; O. L. Phillips; S. E. Williams Extinction risk from climate change, Nature, Volume 427 (2004), pp. 145-148 | DOI

[Vitasse et al., 2011] Y. Vitasse; C. François; N. Delpierre; E. Dufrêne; A. Kremer; I. Chuine; S. Delzon Assessing the effects of climate change on the phenology of European temperate trees, Agric. Meteorol., Volume 151 (2011), pp. 969-980 | DOI

[Vitasse et al., 2018] Y. Vitasse; L. Schneider; C. Rixen; D. Christen; M. Rebetez Increase in the risk of exposure of forest and fruit trees to spring frosts at higher elevations in Switzerland over the last four decades, Agric. Meteorol., Volume 248 (2018), pp. 60-69 | DOI

[Walther et al., 2002] G.-R. Walther; E. Post; P. Convey; A. Menzel; C. Parmesan; T. J. C. Beebee; J.-M. Fromentin; O. Hoegh-Guldberg; F. Bairlein Ecological responses to recent climate change, Nature, Volume 416 (2002), pp. 389-395 | DOI

[Walther et al., 2005] G. R. Walther; S. Berger; M. T. Sykes An ecological “footprint” of climate change, Proc. R. Soc. B, Volume 272 (2005), pp. 1427-1432 | DOI

[Walther, 2003] G. R. Walther Plants in a warmer world, Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst., Volume 6 (2003), pp. 169-185 | DOI

[Walther, 2010] G. R. Walther Community and ecosystem responses to recent climate change, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B, Volume 365 (2010), pp. 2019-2024 | DOI

[Wardlaw and Wrigley, 1994] I. Wardlaw; C. Wrigley Heat tolerance in temperate cereals – an overview, Aust. J. Plant Physiol., Volume 21 (1994), pp. 695-703

[Wheeler et al., 1996] T. R. Wheeler; G. R. Batts; R. H. Ellis; P. Hadley; J. I. L. Morison Growth and yield of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) crops in response to CO 2 and temperature, J. Agric. Sci., Volume 12 (1996), pp. 37-48 | DOI

[White et al., 2020] P. S. White; A. Choi; R. Pandey; A. Menezes; M. Penley; A. K. Gibson; J. D. Roode; L. Morran Host heterogeneity mitigates virulence evolution, Biol. Lett., Volume 16 (2020), 20190744 | DOI

[Wolff, 2004] F. Wolff Industrial transformation and agriculture : agrobiodiversity loss as sustainability problem, Proceedings of the 2003 Berlin Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change (K. Jacob; M. Binder; A. Wieczorek, eds.), Environmental Policy Research Centre, Berlin, 2004, pp. 338-355

[Wolkovich et al., 2018] E. M. Wolkovich; I. García De Cortázar-Atauri; I. Morales-Castilla; K. A. Nicholas; T. Lacombe From Pinot to Xinomavro in the world’s future wine-growing regions, Nat. Clim. Change, Volume 8 (2018), pp. 29-37 | DOI

[Wood et al., 2012] T. E. Wood; M. A. Cavaleri; S. C. Reed Tropical forest carbon balance in a warmer world : a critical review spanning microbial- to ecosystem-scale processes, Biol. Rev., Volume 87 (2012), pp. 912-927 | DOI


Commentaires - Politique