Museum für Naturkunde

Research that combines all available studies of biological responses to regional and global climate change shows that 81–83% of all observations were consistent with the expected impacts of climate change. These findings were replicated across taxa and oceanic basins. Past meta-analyses of the response of marine organisms to climate change have examined a limited range of locations1,2, taxonomic groups2,3,4 and/or biological responses5,6. This has precluded a robust overview of the effect of climate change in the global ocean. Here, we synthesized all available studies of the consistency of marine ecological observations with expectations under climate change. This yielded a meta-database of 1,735 marine biological responses for which either regional or global climate change was considered as a driver. Included were instances of marine taxa responding as expected, in a manner inconsistent with expectations, and taxa demonstrating no response. From this database, 81–83% of all observations for distribution, phenology, community composition, abundance, demography and calcification across taxa and ocean basins were consistent with the expected impacts of climate change. Of the species responding to climate change, rates of distribution shifts were, on average, consistent with those required to track ocean surface temperature changes. Conversely, we did not find a relationship between regional shifts in spring phenology and the seasonality of temperature. Rates of observed shifts in species’ distributions and phenology are comparable to, or greater, than those for terrestrial systems.

The Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary approximately 65.5 million years ago marks one of the three largest mass extinctions in the past 500 million years. The extinction event coincided with a large asteroid impact at Chicxulub, Mexico, and occurred within the time of Deccan flood basalt volcanism in India. Here, we synthesize records of the global stratigraphy across this boundary to assess the proposed causes of the mass extinction. Notably, a single ejecta-rich deposit compositionally linked to the Chicxulub impact is globally distributed at the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary. The temporal match between the ejecta layer and the onset of the extinctions and the agreement of ecological patterns in the fossil record with modeled environmental perturbations (for example, darkness and cooling) lead us to conclude that the Chicxulub impact triggered the mass extinction.

Anthropogenic trade and development have broken down dispersal barriers, facilitating the spread of diseases that threaten Earth's biodiversity. We present a global, quantitative assessment of the amphibian chytridiomycosis panzootic, one of the most impactful examples of disease spread, and demonstrate its role in the decline of at least 501 amphibian species over the past half-century, including 90 presumed extinctions. The effects of chytridiomycosis have been greatest in large-bodied, range-restricted anurans in wet climates in the Americas and Australia. Declines peaked in the 1980s, and only 12% of declined species show signs of recovery, whereas 39% are experiencing ongoing decline. There is risk of further chytridiomycosis outbreaks in new areas. The chytridiomycosis panzootic represents the greatest recorded loss of biodiversity attributable to a disease.

Climate change challenges organisms to adapt or move to track changes in environments in space and time. We used two measures of thermal shifts from analyses of global temperatures over the past 50 years to describe the pace of climate change that species should track: the velocity of climate change (geographic shifts of isotherms over time) and the shift in seasonal timing of temperatures. Both measures are higher in the ocean than on land at some latitudes, despite slower ocean warming. These indices give a complex mosaic of predicted range shifts and phenology changes that deviate from simple poleward migration and earlier springs or later falls. They also emphasize potential conservation concerns, because areas of high marine biodiversity often have greater velocities of climate change and seasonal shifts.

Ocean acidification may have severe consequences for marine ecosystems; however, assessing its future impact is difficult because laboratory experiments and field observations are limited by their reduced ecologic complexity and sample period, respectively. In contrast, the geological record contains long-term evidence for a variety of global environmental perturbations, including ocean acidification plus their associated biotic responses. We review events exhibiting evidence for elevated atmospheric CO(2), global warming, and ocean acidification over the past ~300 million years of Earth's history, some with contemporaneous extinction or evolutionary turnover among marine calcifiers. Although similarities exist, no past event perfectly parallels future projections in terms of disrupting the balance of ocean carbonate chemistry-a consequence of the unprecedented rapidity of CO(2) release currently taking place.

Climate change will have far-reaching impacts on biodiversity, including increasing extinction rates. Current approaches to quantifying such impacts focus on measuring exposure to climatic change and largely ignore the biological differences between species that may significantly increase or reduce their vulnerability. To address this, we present a framework for assessing three dimensions of climate change vulnerability, namely sensitivity, exposure and adaptive capacity; this draws on species' biological traits and their modeled exposure to projected climatic changes. In the largest such assessment to date, we applied this approach to each of the world's birds, amphibians and corals (16,857 species). The resulting assessments identify the species with greatest relative vulnerability to climate change and the geographic areas in which they are concentrated, including the Amazon basin for amphibians and birds, and the central Indo-west Pacific (Coral Triangle) for corals. We found that high concentration areas for species with traits conferring highest sensitivity and lowest adaptive capacity differ from those of highly exposed species, and we identify areas where exposure-based assessments alone may over or under-estimate climate change impacts. We found that 608-851 bird (6-9%), 670-933 amphibian (11-15%), and 47-73 coral species (6-9%) are both highly climate change vulnerable and already threatened with extinction on the IUCN Red List. The remaining highly climate change vulnerable species represent new priorities for conservation. Fewer species are highly climate change vulnerable under lower IPCC SRES emissions scenarios, indicating that reducing greenhouse emissions will reduce climate change driven extinctions. Our study answers the growing call for a more biologically and ecologically inclusive approach to assessing climate change vulnerability. By facilitating independent assessment of the three dimensions of climate change vulnerability, our approach can be used to devise species and area-specific conservation interventions and indices. The priorities we identify will strengthen global strategies to mitigate climate change impacts.

Our ability to correlate biological evolution with climate change, geological evolution, and other historical patterns is essential to understanding the processes that shape biodiversity. Combining data from the fossil record with molecular phylogenetics represents an exciting synthetic approach to this challenge. The first molecular divergence dating analysis (Zuckerkandl and Pauling 1962) was based on a measure of the amino acid differences in the hemoglobin molecule, with replacement rates established (calibrated) using paleontological age estimates from textbooks (e.g., Dodson 1960). Since that time, the amount of molecular sequence data has increased dramatically, affording ever-greater opportunities to apply molecular divergence approaches to fundamental problems in evolutionary biology. To capitalize on these opportunities, increasingly sophisticated divergence dating methods have been, and continue to be, developed. In contrast, comparatively, little attention has been devoted to critically assessing the paleontological and associated geological data used in divergence dating analyses. The lack of rigorous protocols for assigning calibrations based on fossils raises serious questions about the credibility of divergence dating results (e.g., Shaul and Graur 2002; Brochu et al. 2004; Graur and Martin 2004; Hedges and Kumar 2004; Reisz and Müller 2004a, 2004b; Theodor 2004; van Tuinen and Hadly 2004a, 2004b; van Tuinen et al. 2004; Benton and Donoghue 2007; Donoghue and Benton 2007; Parham and Irmis 2008; Ksepka 2009; Benton et al. 2009; Heads 2011). The assertion that incorrect calibrations will negatively influence divergence dating studies is not controversial. Attempts to identify incorrect calibrations through the use of a posteriori methods are available (e.g., Near and Sanderson 2004; Near et al. 2005; Rutschmann et al. 2007; Marshall 2008; Pyron 2010; Dornburg et al. 2011). We do not deny that a posteriori methods are a useful means of evaluating calibrations, but there can be no substitute for a priori assessment of the veracity of paleontological data. Incorrect calibrations, those based upon fossils that are phylogenetically misplaced or assigned incorrect ages, clearly introduce error into an analysis. Consequently, thorough and explicit justification of both phylogenetic and chronologic age assessments is necessary for all fossils used for calibration. Such explicit justifications will help to ensure that divergence dating studies are based on the best available data. Unfortunately, the majority of previously published calibrations lack explicit explanations and justifications of the age and phylogenetic position of the key fossils. In the absence of explicit justifications, it is difficult to distinguish between correct and incorrect calibrations, and it becomes difficult to reevaluate previous claims in light of new data. Paleontology is a dynamic science, with new data and perspectives constantly emerging as a result of new discoveries (see Kimura 2010 for a recent case where the age of the earliest known record of a clade was more than doubled). Calibrations based upon the best available evidence at a given time can become inappropriate as the discovery of new specimens, new phylogenetic analyses, and ongoing stratigraphic and geochronologic revisions refine our understanding of the fossil record. Our primary goals in this paper are to establish the best practices for justifying fossils used for the temporal calibration of molecular phylogenies. Our examples derive mainly, but not exclusively, from the vertebrate fossil record. We hope that our recommendations will lead to more credible calibrations and, as a result, more reliable divergence dates throughout the tree of life. A secondary goal is to help the community (researchers, editors, and reviewers) who might be unfamiliar with fossils to understand and overcome the challenges associated with using paleontological data. In order to accomplish these goals, we present a specimen-based protocol for selecting and documenting relevant fossils and discuss future directions for evaluating and utilizing phylogenetic and temporal data from the fossil record. We likewise encourage biologists relying on nonfossil calibrations for molecular divergence estimates (e.g., ages of island or mountain range formations, continental drift, and biomarkers) to develop their own set of rigorous guidelines so that their calibrations may also be evaluated in a systematic way. Most studies use a Bayesian framework for estimating divergence dates with probability curves between a minimum and a maximum bound to represent calibrations (time priors) (Thorne et al. 1998; Drummond et al. 2006; Yang 2006; Yang and Rannala 2006). An appropriately constructed fossil calibration uses the oldest assigned fossil of a taxon as the basis for its minimum age and then constructs these other parameters around it (Benton and Donoghue 2007; Donoghue and Benton 2007). One key to improving the use of paleontological data is recognizing that this first step can be tied explicitly to one or a small set of museum specimens, creating a readily auditable chain of evidence. To minimize error and maximize clarity, all calibration data should be derived explicitly from specific fossil specimens. If links between calibration data and specimens cannot be made, then there are serious questions about the validity of the proposed time priors. In this respect, the fossil specimens used for calibrations represent a standard, much in the same way that a holotype specimen (or type series) is a taxonomic standard. In both cases, these specimens provide a necessary reference point for future inquiries. The explicit reporting of specimen data is just as crucial to the scientific integrity of a fossil calibration study as is making genetic sequences publicly available or reporting analytical methods. Thus, it is worthwhile to compile, reiterate, and expand on the caveats from previous studies that pertain to the construction and reporting of fossil calibrations (e.g., Graur and Martin 2004; Hedges and Kumar 2004; van Tuinen and Hadly 2004a, 2004b; Benton and Donoghue 2007; Donoghue and Benton 2007; Gandolfo et al. 2008; Parham and Irmis 2008; Benton et al. 2009; Ksepka 2009; Sanders et al. 2010) while providing a simple and explicit protocol (in checklist form) to address them. The checklist can be divided into justifying phylogenetic position and justifying age and In cases, the data to calibrations are in a but to be In to derived from is explicitly as for a rigorous and explicit approach is for justifying the use of paleontological and geological data for divergence The can be used to develop new calibrations and as a checklist for and justifying previously published calibrations based on fossils. If all are then a calibration can be of that all the relevant and data should be of specimens to the taxon should be An of the or an phylogenetic analysis that the should be on the of and molecular data should be The and stratigraphic the best of from the should be to a published age and of age should be a fossil used for calibration be based on a specimen that all the that it to be assigned to a taxonomic are from specimens, are to be from a divergence dating studies that use paleontological data for calibrations on from phylogenetic that are based on of specimens to a taxon In cases, the basis for a taxonomic can be as as documenting that the specimen was from the same or where other specimens previously Consequently, are a in et al. Parham fossil are not it is necessary to the and of specimens. may be to specimens from to a taxon there are or through phylogenetic analysis et al. 2004; et al. 2009; In where previously cannot be it is necessary to the calibration to a of specimens (e.g., and Parham or the from the calibration. Incorrect phylogenetic of fossil calibrations can introduce into divergence estimates Brochu van Tuinen and Hedges 2004; et al. dating studies on the paleontological for calibration but of the oldest of a have been in a phylogenetic analysis. Gandolfo et al. in incorrect and taxonomic to inappropriate fossil is a for that are a fossil in a taxon than the data can in the (e.g., and 2005; et al. 2010; Sanders et al. The that may use the same taxon to to biological the and may be the fossil record of is we the use of an approach to and phylogenetically specimens that are relevant for paleontological guidelines can also be to fossils (e.g., in the case that their are and evidence for the of a based on explicit and et al. 2008; et al. 2011). fossils are have phylogenetic the analytical on paleontological it is that evidence the taxonomic of relevant be explicitly A is the of to the oldest geological record of a based upon evidence. can be on provide evidence to are of or with specimens, it can be difficult to distinguish the fossil to the or the of the clade that it is used to the earliest will the of the of the and so assigning fossils to the or the of a clade of evolution that is not fossil specimens of may not be as lack one or more of the as a of or secondary Donoghue and 2009; et al. is for that are on the basis of molecular evidence but for is known (e.g., or et al. is also to in of that evolution their In those cases, the that might be of in the time of divergence from the may be difficult to the to the phylogenetic of specimen used for is not to a paper that the taxon or the of used in the phylogenetic of fossils it to The phylogenetic position of a fossil taxon can be specimens are a thorough of the paleontological is to that the recent study is claims about the oldest of a may as new data and are A of this is the case of the oldest the are fossils that to be the clade of of the of do not the In more recent analyses, have been the tree et al. and are to be on the of and where no evidence about a minimum for in phylogenetic position from about the of than from in study or discovery of specimens. specimens, new of specimens, and phylogenetic lead to revisions in the phylogenetic of fossils. as the may and stratigraphic associated with fossil specimens, but relevant phylogenetic justifying the taxonomic of these specimens is rates of in and to be as as and the of taxonomic in as the to our specimen-based are useful for the oldest specimens to a given is necessary to the phylogenetic position of a specimen for calibration. In the best cases, fossil specimens that to be assigned to a with In these assigning fossils to is of the tree the fossil will the and as a calibration for all in it is In other cases, the position of a fossil is and is on the of a specific analysis. In to the position of a taxon given (see between of and molecular phylogenetic is a that has been (Benton et al. 2009; et al. 2010; et al. from and molecular can fossil calibrations in In cases, the of a fossil may become to about it can be used to If data of the of also may be to of evolution, the of fossils in a tree et al. 2005; et al. and molecular are in the phylogenetic position of a fossil cannot be to a a that a fossil taxon is justification for a fossil calibration. A fossil with can be assigned to a specific with of the the fossil will the and as a calibration for all it is phylogenetic from data can the position of fossil In the a fossil is to be to and the that the fossil A molecular study with a and making the of the fossil If the fossil is to then it If the fossil is to then it is a calibration for just one to can the of and of fossils. In the a fossil is in the to A molecular analysis the of the and In a the for the clade are in a way and so using the fossil to clade be problems of and molecular can be (e.g., Brochu and 2008; and 2008; Ksepka or through the use of a in and, the phylogenetic position of known from fossils (e.g., et al. and Parham 2006). those approaches and explicitly to the data from fossil specimens with the of molecular about the of molecular data. methods do not so a approach to based on or is In cases, it may be that the and molecular data are so that a evidence a molecular approach are for the position of an given the phylogenetic position of use of the oldest fossil specimens to has a probability of error into the analysis (see et al. et al. We using to divergence dating analyses. are to analysis is the of specimens used for calibrations be The with a fossil can be to a specific in a stratigraphic but on the data might be to a in a stratigraphic or a or or a specimens, those more than or those derived from the lack stratigraphic and data and so have for calibration fossil in can be assigned to its and to a stratigraphic that In the best cases, calibration data will be based upon fossils with and stratigraphic that can be assigned to a in a The with a fossil can be a stratigraphic framework will have a on estimates of its and in light of in revisions of and in (e.g., formations, and are the key used to correlate and the sequence in a have (e.g., and explicitly and fossil taxon has and geological that provide a basis for its The given is for on the can be a useful minimum calibration for specimens of are known and the of is the oldest specimens. is from the in the it is from the the it is from is of a stratigraphic for the the can be in the the can be assigned to the and a the of this and is to represent in the stratigraphic where et al. the is to on the basis of ages and methods based on the et al. specimen a minimum age of are of in of or represent of Most do not represent of may be might represent of with of the time range at do the between with geochronologic of the of a fossil to a a of the age of the fossil that can then be used to establish a age as is not a stratigraphic is or with the of new and new or and can lead to of the present at a (e.g., and The dynamic of the of for fossil specimens in order to the of stratigraphic and upon divergence dating calibrations and, divergence time dating ages, but do not use or The age of a fossil is the of for the geochronologic data for dates can be difficult to establish for a and much and so provide a more framework for reporting fossil The of fossil to ages a chain of through on the basis of geological and paleontological evidence (e.g., van Tuinen and Hadly Benton et al. 2009; 2011). for the majority of calibrations, this is not the used in are not The age of a fossil is not it is established through than through dating at the in the fossil was age for a fossil specimen is the best and can be through dating methods have dating an order of in the as a result of new of and methods (e.g., et al. 2004; 2006; et al. and ages that to (e.g., et al. of this ongoing it is to the basis upon the age is If the chain of is the of revisions will be its our for justifying the age of a calibration point is that the of from paleontological studies should reference or published that ages (e.g., and et al. et al. 2004; 2010; and on are constantly and can become these it for to A of this step in the protocol the of the age from the geological a minimum age the age of the fossil should be used the of the relevant time than the of a in the a fossil the of the to it is the age from an will the minimum from the age of it is to that the minimum age is one a and is to not on its the age of the minimum age should the age of the fossil the error associated with the geochronologic age Tuinen et al. 2004; Donoghue and Benton 2007; Benton and Donoghue 2007; Benton et al. age should be as a The assigning based on the age of the fossil has been (e.g., van Tuinen et al. 2004; Benton and Donoghue 2007; Donoghue and Benton 2007). may to use in of or but The of a minimum age that the estimates for a fossil should be The justification for the might to a but paleontological data are established and that to introduce error into the analysis. In cases, of or the age of a fossil may not be a stratigraphic in cases, it is to much more and dates than are given a stratigraphic data may not be available in the the fossil specimens used for calibrations, and so it is necessary to evidence from fossil may not be to those data more than molecular but the specimen and ages in a may the the of dates In to the of the specimen-based we that about the of that or Such of calibrations in (e.g., Benton and Donoghue 2007; et al. 2007; Benton et al. it for to the justification the relevant and We should that through and analysis that the calibrations be or In order to the evolution of justifications, we that (or of should become a of calibration The justification of the phylogenetic position and age of a fossil is an first step to a in a divergence dating analysis. In to can be assigned time may not have this step the data from the fossil the minimum bound of a calibration The maximum bound and the of the are also based on the fossil but in a much more probability of the oldest known The of these other parameters from a protocol for them. the maximum is established as than all the oldest to a time the and for the of the are but no are the maximum an approach that into and phylogenetic has been proposed (e.g., Reisz and Müller Müller and Reisz 2005; Benton and Donoghue 2007; Donoghue and Benton 2007; Benton et al. approach is and from the fossil established Marshall who use this approach should provide justifying their so that can and, the of Benton and Donoghue and and the maximum should be and Most studies use a Bayesian framework for estimating divergence dates with probability curves between minimum and maximum In may be of the fossil but there is no way to parameters and and of little more than A of recent studies that these parameters are not et al. The of these are et al. 2010; et al. and et al. the that a is to that have a on results et al. et al. is a of molecular divergence dating The of methods for estimating maximum and probability curves should be a (see In order to the of our specimen-based we apply it to used calibrations in the vertebrate of the tree of the and the from A of the the of the paleontological data for these The of the specimen-based protocol to these results in new We also provide examples of our calibration as as maximum the the approach of Benton and Donoghue of ages for point calibrations, The data for this can be in The of Paleontology and holotype of et al. that the of (in the clade a of it in the clade also et al. a previously proposed calibration point for et al. can be in it the processes of the at the for the is the and the of the of the an is it a of the that is to the of the the of the the a is present at the of the of the for of of into the are on the and it the of of the et al. 2011). The of et al. is with molecular of that a (e.g., and 1998; Hedges and and et al. et al. 2005; et al. 2007; et al. 2009; et al. et al. et al. molecular data have for a clade and and et al. et al. or a clade and for these an where are the taxon to a is et al. et 2005; et al. The majority of recent molecular a et al. 2005; et al. 2007; et al. 2009; et al. 2009; et al. and of as or not the oldest calibration point or the phylogenetic of of the vertebrate fossils that are to be to other in and 2005; et al. is relevant is that the an and that is in age and and to other and 2007; and the also the taxon and a taxon in throughout et al. and 2005; and The data that these the and The is with ages, so the of the is to et al. The and is one of the fundamental calibrations for vertebrate studies (e.g., et al. 2007; et al. it as an calibration for both and molecular (e.g., et al. 2002; and 2006; 2007; and 2010) and is relevant to in (Benton and Donoghue 2007). used a secondary calibration for this has been and Martin 2004; Müller and Reisz on the to have not been used for calibration the earliest fossils from the and Reisz 2005; Benton and Donoghue 2007). Müller and Reisz proposed an age of for this based on the of the the of the is using recent age data et al. is phylogenetically as a of the (e.g., and 2006; 2007; and 2007; et al. 2011). its age is is from the of the in this has been to the using vertebrate and and this is with et al. and age data and Unfortunately, vertebrate is in (e.g., et al. 2009; Irmis et al. so the age of is not an age for this it a minimum age of divergence for the of et al. studies have this calibration (e.g., et al. Benton and Donoghue proposed an age of for this based on the of the from the of is a for the it has been in a phylogenetic and there is evidence that it is a of phylogenetically the and et al. from the of a that is the oldest of the of phylogenetically this fossil is no than also problems in the age of is vertebrate (see et al. et al. from the but these the same problems as other (see and are no than from the of was first as a of and with this phylogenetic of the specimen et al. that it to the age of a minimum for the for the maximum age for is difficult recent fossil discoveries have the age of divergence for this fossil evidence that the earliest based on the that a of have to the et al. but this not the that of will be to have a the of the with present in and et al. 2011). this (e.g., the the with We that the age of the oldest of the but to the a for a maximum it is the oldest fossil and all fossils. is clearly as a and and is to the and The is ages to that we do not of the is we that a maximum for be studies inappropriate calibrations that have error into divergence dating (e.g., Graur and Martin 2004; Gandolfo et al. 2008; Ksepka 2009; Sanders et al. In order to the of the specimen-based protocol can identify inappropriate calibrations, we examples and In the the published minimum age cannot be with specimen-based evidence so we a much minimum age in the the published minimum age cannot be with specimen evidence. In we cannot identify specimen that will all the of the protocol for that and so that future do not is not that these be but then it not be the fossil data calibrations is clearly to data into analysis. The checklist is an first step to other incorrect calibrations and more reliable time priors. calibrations are more to be of will molecular divergence dates more and provide in A specimen-based protocol will attention on between the fossil record and published calibration making it for to identify and correct and refine calibrations as new data to the reporting of data in (e.g., our is a crucial first In to providing this we identify as the for more methods for selecting parameters of time maximum and probability and the associated with from In both cases, can be in our checklist protocol will help identify the oldest fossil of a that can a time with an minimum fossils the time of the represent (e.g., Marshall Benton and Benton and Donoghue 2007). The probability of the oldest fossil is the other Bayesian calibration parameters to these parameters estimates of that to the of a et al. for of fossil and to provide of in the fossil The amount of to rigorous paleontological for is To studies have of fossil with of record at small taxonomic or Benton et al. 2004; and 2007; and for the of time priors. approach was to Bayesian and 2010; and 2010) on dates that be as Bayesian for divergence dating but we do not of studies that have this of time based on the temporal of and then used as time for divergence dating et al. 2011). The and of these and other methods to time parameters should be a for the divergence dating the of will be the of relevant data. genetic sequences is not the but the will more from in order to and the data from the fossil record. A the problems we address is the associated with from the first step of the specimen-based specimen and justifying is a for a molecular a for their Such challenges can be through or a study that has the are not but also introduce and these data be of time or at more The step is to that the and of paleontological calibration data to the way that molecular sequence data are on The is an for this as the based on Benton and Donoghue We can a of that et al. that is to other of biological data as the and the of We encourage and to a more providing data that the in and to to provide these data to their have to calibration data for divergence If paleontological data can be to their position in this it will result in more and the to to be explicitly with molecular will encourage the of phylogenetic for of data and for future (e.g., differences in rates of and molecular evolution, between and The recommendations to explicitly ages will and with The for more to maximum dates should the of methods for the fossil record. on the fossils will all the of to the we can a new community of to develop a more and rigorous approach to the study of evolution and the of life. can be in the data was the and of the of the of and a and The and and from the is the to the was through an from the of and are for their and was at a in in The of at the of is for this of with and the fossil record. We for to use the of from the for

It has previously been thought that there was a steep Cretaceous and Cenozoic radiation of marine invertebrates. This pattern can be replicated with a new data set of fossil occurrences representing 3.5 million specimens, but only when older analytical protocols are used. Moreover, analyses that employ sampling standardization and more robust counting methods show a modest rise in diversity with no clear trend after the mid-Cretaceous. Globally, locally, and at both high and low latitudes, diversity was less than twice as high in the Neogene as in the mid-Paleozoic. The ratio of global to local richness has changed little, and a latitudinal diversity gradient was present in the early Paleozoic.

Abstract Systematic assessments of species extinction risk at regular intervals are necessary for informing conservation action 1,2 . Ongoing developments in taxonomy, threatening processes and research further underscore the need for reassessment 3,4 . Here we report the findings of the second Global Amphibian Assessment, evaluating 8,011 species for the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species. We find that amphibians are the most threatened vertebrate class (40.7% of species are globally threatened). The updated Red List Index shows that the status of amphibians is deteriorating globally, particularly for salamanders and in the Neotropics. Disease and habitat loss drove 91% of status deteriorations between 1980 and 2004. Ongoing and projected climate change effects are now of increasing concern, driving 39% of status deteriorations since 2004, followed by habitat loss (37%). Although signs of species recoveries incentivize immediate conservation action, scaled-up investment is urgently needed to reverse the current trends.

Greening roofs or walls to cool down city areas during summer, to capture storm water, to abate pollution, and to increase human well-being while enhancing biodiversity: nature-based solutions (NBS) refer to the sustainable management and use of nature for tackling societal challenges. Building on and comple- menting traditional biodiversity conservation and management strategies, NBS integrate science, policy, and practice and create biodiversity benefits in terms of diverse, well-managed ecosystems.

Vocalizations of anuran amphibians have received much attention in studies of behavioral ecology and physiology, but also provide informative characters for identifying and delimiting species. We here review the terminology and variation of frog calls from a perspective of integrative taxonomy, and provide hands-on protocols for recording, analyzing, comparing, interpreting and describing these sounds. Our focus is on advertisement calls, which serve as premating isolation mechanisms and, therefore, convey important taxonomic information. We provide recommendations for terminology of frog vocalizations, with call, note and pulse being the fundamental subunits to be used in descriptions and comparisons. However, due to the complexity and diversity of these signals, an unequivocal application of the terms call and note can be challenging. We therefore provide two coherent concepts that either follow a note-centered approach (defining uninterrupted units of sound as notes, and their entirety as call) or a call-centered approach (defining uninterrupted units as call whenever they are separated by long silent intervals) in terminology. Based on surveys of literature, we show that numerous call traits can be highly variable within and between individuals of one species. Despite idiosyncrasies of species and higher taxa, the duration of calls or notes, pulse rate within notes, and number of pulses per note appear to be more static within individuals and somewhat less affected by temperature. Therefore, these variables might often be preferable as taxonomic characters over call rate or note rate, which are heavily influenced by various factors. Dominant frequency is also comparatively static and only weakly affected by temperature, but depends strongly on body size. As with other taxonomic characters, strong call divergence is typically indicative of species-level differences, whereas call similarities of two populations are no evidence for them being conspecific. Taxonomic conclusions can especially be drawn when the general advertisement call structure of two candidate species is radically different and qualitative call differences are thus observed. On the other hand, quantitative differences in call traits might substantially vary within and among conspecific populations, and require careful evaluation and analysis. We provide guidelines for the taxonomic interpretation of advertisement call differences in sympatric and allopatric situations, and emphasize the need for an integrative use of multiple datasets (bio-acoustics, morphology, genetics), particularly for allopatric scenarios. We show that small-sized frogs often emit calls with frequency components in the ultrasound spectrum, although it is unlikely that these high frequencies are of biological relevance for the majority of them, and we illustrate that detection of upper harmonics depends also on recording distance because higher frequencies are attenuated more strongly. Bioacoustics remains a prime approach in integrative taxonomy of anurans if uncertainty due to possible intraspecific variation and technical artifacts is adequately considered and acknowledged.

Abstract— Quartz, as a ubiquitous mineral constituent of the Earth's crust, displays the greatest variety of well‐defined residual shock effects among all rock‐forming minerals. It represents an important and most reliable shock barometer and thermometer for terrestrial impact formations. In this paper, the current status of knowledge about the nature, origin, and experimental pressure‐temperature calibration of shock‐induced deformations and phase transformations is reviewed for natural and experimental shock conditions.

The extraordinary species richness and endemism of the Indo-Australian Archipelago (IAA) exists in one of the most geologically dynamic regions of the planet. The provenance of its biota has been debated, particularly in the area known as Wallacea. Application of molecular genetic approaches and a better understanding of the region's complex geology have stimulated much recent biogeographic work in the IAA. We review molecular phylogenetic and phylogeographic studies in light of current geological evidence. Present distribution patterns of species have been shaped largely by pre-Pleistocene dispersal and vicariance events, whereas more recent changes in the connectivity of islands within the Archipelago have influenced the partitioning of intraspecific variation. Many genetic studies have uncovered cryptic species with restricted distributions. We discuss the conservation significance of the region and highlight the need for cross-taxon comparative studies using newly developed analytical approaches well suited to the challenges of historical inference in this region.

Morphologists have historically had to rely on destructive procedures to visualize the three-dimensional (3-D) anatomy of animals. More recently, however, non-destructive techniques have come to the forefront. These include X-ray computed tomography (CT), which has been used most commonly to examine the mineralized, hard-tissue anatomy of living and fossil metazoans. One relatively new and potentially transformative aspect of current CT-based research is the use of chemical agents to render visible, and differentiate between, soft-tissue structures in X-ray images. Specifically, iodine has emerged as one of the most widely used of these contrast agents among animal morphologists due to its ease of handling, cost effectiveness, and differential affinities for major types of soft tissues. The rapid adoption of iodine-based contrast agents has resulted in a proliferation of distinct specimen preparations and scanning parameter choices, as well as an increasing variety of imaging hardware and software preferences. Here we provide a critical review of the recent contributions to iodine-based, contrast-enhanced CT research to enable researchers just beginning to employ contrast enhancement to make sense of this complex new landscape of methodologies. We provide a detailed summary of recent case studies, assess factors that govern success at each step of the specimen storage, preparation, and imaging processes, and make recommendations for standardizing both techniques and reporting practices. Finally, we discuss potential cutting-edge applications of diffusible iodine-based contrast-enhanced computed tomography (diceCT) and the issues that must still be overcome to facilitate the broader adoption of diceCT going forward.

Biological responses to climate change have been widely documented across taxa and regions, but it remains unclear whether species are maintaining a good match between phenotype and environment, i.e. whether observed trait changes are adaptive. Here we reviewed 10,090 abstracts and extracted data from 71 studies reported in 58 relevant publications, to assess quantitatively whether phenotypic trait changes associated with climate change are adaptive in animals. A meta-analysis focussing on birds, the taxon best represented in our dataset, suggests that global warming has not systematically affected morphological traits, but has advanced phenological traits. We demonstrate that these advances are adaptive for some species, but imperfect as evidenced by the observed consistent selection for earlier timing. Application of a theoretical model indicates that the evolutionary load imposed by incomplete adaptive responses to ongoing climate change may already be threatening the persistence of species.

Stochastic simulation is a key tool in population genetics, since the models involved are often analytically intractable and simulation is usually the only way of obtaining ground-truth data to evaluate inferences. Because of this, a large number of specialized simulation programs have been developed, each filling a particular niche, but with largely overlapping functionality and a substantial duplication of effort. Here, we introduce msprime version 1.0, which efficiently implements ancestry and mutation simulations based on the succinct tree sequence data structure and the tskit library. We summarize msprime's many features, and show that its performance is excellent, often many times faster and more memory efficient than specialized alternatives. These high-performance features have been thoroughly tested and validated, and built using a collaborative, open source development model, which reduces duplication of effort and promotes software quality via community engagement.

ABSTRACT Aim To assess the extent to which climate change might cause changes in potential natural vegetation (PNV) across Europe. Location Europe. Method We parameterized a generalized dynamic vegetation model (LPJ‐GUESS) for the most common European tree species, and, for the first time, modelled large‐scale vegetation dynamics using a process‐based model explicitly representing tree species, age cohorts, gap dynamics and biogeochemical cycles in a single framework. For projections, the model was driven with climate scenario data from two atmosphere–ocean general circulation models (AOGCMs), downscaled to 10 × 10′ spatial resolution ( c . 18.5 × 12 km at 50° N). Results At a general level, modelled present‐day PNV corresponded better with an expert reconstruction of the PNV than most earlier plant functional type (PFT)‐based simulations, but at a finer scale the model and the expert map showed substantial discrepancies in some areas. Simulations until 2085 showed considerable successional shifts in vegetation types in most areas: 31–42% of the total area of Europe was projected to be covered by a different vegetation type by the year 2085. In the long term, equilibrium changes are substantially larger: simulations with one climate scenario suggest that 76–80% of the European land surface could exist within another PNV if climate was stabilized by the end of the century and vegetation had unlimited time to achieve equilibrium with the new climate. ‘Hotspots’ of change include arctic and alpine ecosystems, where trees replace tundra in the model, and the transition zone between temperate broad‐leaved and boreal conifer forest. In southern Europe, the model projected widespread shifts from forest to shrublands as a result of drought. Main conclusions The model presents a considerable advance in modelling dynamic changes in natural vegetation across Europe. Climate change might cause substantial changes in PNV across Europe, which should be considered in the management of reserves and forestry.

Editorial – The Science of Citizen Science Evolves -- Chapter 1: What Is Citizen Science? The Challenges of Definition -- Chapter 2: Citizen Science in Europe -- Part I: Citizen Science as Science -- Chapter 3: Science as a Commons: Improving the Governance of Knowledge through Citizen Science -- Chapter 4: Citizen Science in the Natural Sciences -- Chapter 5: Citizen Humanities -- Chapter 6: Citizen Social Science: New and Established Approaches to Participation in Social Research -- Chapter 7: Data Quality in Citizen Science -- Chapter 8: A Conceptual Model for Participants and Activities in Citizen Science Projects -- Chapter 9: Machine Learning in Citizen Science: Promises and Implications -- Chapter 10: Participation and Co-creation in Citizen Science -- Chapter 11: Citizen Science, Health, and Environmental Justice -- Part II: Citizen Science in Society -- Chapter 12: Participants in Citizen Science -- Chapter 13: Inclusiveness and Diversity in Citizen Science -- Chapter 14: Learning in Citizen Science Chapter -- Chapter 15: Citizen Science Case Studies and Their Impacts on Social Innovation -- Chapter 16: Science as a Lever: The Roles and Power of Civil Society Organisations in Citizen Science -- Chapter 17: Citizen Science and Policy -- Chapter 18: Creating Positive Environmental Impact through Citizen Science -- Chapter 19: Ethical Challenges and Dynamic Informed Consent -- Part III: Citizen Science in Practice -- Chapter 20: Finding What You Need: A Guide to Citizen Science Guidelines -- Chapter 21: Citizen Science Platforms -- Chapter 22: Citizen Science in the Digital World of Apps -- Chapter 23: Communication and Dissemination in Citizen Science -- Chapter 24: Evaluation in Citizen Science: The Art of Tracing a Moving Target Part IV: Conclusions / Lessons Learnt -- Chapter 25: The Recent Past and Possible Futures of Citizen Science: Final Remarks.

Phylogeny and characteristics of ruminants Ruminants are a diverse group of mammals that includes families containing well-known taxa such as deer, cows, and goats. However, their evolutionary relationships have been contentious, as have the origins of their distinctive digestive systems and headgear, including antlers and horns (see the Perspective by Ker and Yang). To understand the relationships among ruminants, L. Chen et al. sequenced 44 species representing 6 families and performed a phylogenetic analysis. From this analysis, they were able to resolve the phylogeny of many genera and document incomplete lineage sorting among major clades. Interestingly, they found evidence for large population reductions among many taxa starting at approximately 100,000 years ago, coinciding with the migration of humans out of Africa. Examining the bony appendages on the head—the so-called headgear—Wang et al. describe specific evolutionary changes in the ruminants and identify selection on cancer-related genes that may function in antler development in deer. Finally, Lin et al. take a close look at the reindeer genome and identify the genetic basis of adaptations that allow reindeer to survive in the harsh conditions of the Arctic. Science , this issue p. eaav6202 , p. eaav6335 , p. eaav6312 ; see also p. 1130

Abstract We reevaluate the systematics and geologic setting of terrestrial, lunar, Martian, and asteroidal “impactites” resulting from single or multiple impacts. For impactites derived from silicate rocks and sediments, we propose a unified and updated system of progressive shock metamorphism. “Shock‐metamorphosed rocks” occur as lithic clasts or melt particles in proximal impactites at impact craters, and rarely in distal impactites. They represent a wide range of metamorphism, typically ranging from unshocked to shock melted. As the degree of shock metamorphism, at a given shock pressure, depends primarily on the mineralogical composition and the porosity of a rock or sediment sample, different shock classification systems are required for different types of planetary rocks and sediments. We define shock classification systems for eight rock and sediment classes which are assigned to three major groups of rocks and sediments (1) crystalline rocks with classes F, M, A, and U; (2) chondritic rocks (class C); and (3) sedimentary rocks and sediments with classes SR , SE , and RE . The abbreviations stand for felsic (F), mafic (M), anorthositic (A), ultramafic (U), sedimentary rocks ( SR ), unconsolidated sediments ( SE ), and regoliths ( RE ). In each class, the progressive stages of shock metamorphism are denominated S1 to Sx. These progressive shock stages are introduced as: S1–S7 for F , S1–S7 for M, S1–S6 for A , S1–S7 for U , S1–S7 for C , S1–S7 for SR , S1–S5 for SE , and S1–S6 for RE . S1 stands for “unshocked” and Sx (variable between S5 and S7) stands for “whole rock melting.” We propose a sequence of symbols characterizing the degree of shock metamorphism of a sample, i.e., F‐S1 to F‐S7 with the option to add the tabulated pressure ranges (in GP a) in parentheses.