Article 1: The Current Mass Extinction

Is the biosphere today on the verge of anything like the mass extinctions of the geological past? Could
some equivalent of meteorite impacts or dramatic climate change be underway, as humankind's rapid
destruction of natural habitats forces animals and plants out of existence?

Increasingly, researchers are doing the numbers, and saying, yes, if present trends continue, a mass
extinction is very likely underway. The evidence is pieced together from details drawn from all over the
world, but it adds up to a disturbing picture. This time, unlike the past, it's not a chance asteroid
collision, nor a chain of climatic circumstances alone that's at fault. Instead, it is chiefly the activities of
an ever-growing human population, in concert with long-term environmental change.

The background level of extinction known from the fossil record is about one species per million
species per year, or between 10 and 100 species per year (counting all organisms such as
insects, bacteria, and fungi, not just the large vertebrates we are most familiar with). In contrast,
estimates based on the rate at which the area of tropical forests is being reduced, and their large
numbers of specialized species, are that we may now be losing 27,000 species per year to extinction
from those habitats alone.

The typical rate of extinction differs for different groups of organisms. Mammals, for instance, have an
average species "lifespan" from origination to extinction of about 1 million years, although some
species persist for as long as 10 million years. There are about 5,000 known mammalian species alive at
present. Given the average species lifespan for mammals, the background extinction rate for this group
would be approximately one species lost every 200 years. Of course, this is an average rate -- the actual
pattern of mammalian extinctions is likely to be somewhat uneven. Some centuries might see more
than one mammalian extinction, and conversely, sometimes several centuries might pass without the
loss of any mammal species. Yet the past 400 years have seen 89 mammalian extinctions, almost 45
times the predicted rate, and another 169 mammal species are listed as critically endangered.

Therein lies the concern biologists have for many of today's species. While the number of actual
documented extinctions may not seem that high, they know that many more species are "living dead"
-- populations so critically small that they have little hope of survival. Other species are among the
living dead because of their interrelationships -- for example, the loss of a pollinator can doom the
plant it pollinates, and a prey species can take its predator with it into extinction. By some estimates, as
much as 30 percent of the world's animals and plants could be on a path to extinction within 100 years.
These losses are likely to be unevenly distributed, as some geographic areas and some groups of
organisms are more vulnerable to extinction than others. Tropical rainforest species are at especially
high risk, as are top carnivores, species with small geographic ranges, and marine reef species.

Humanity's main impact on the extinction rate is landscape modification, an impact greatly increased
by the burgeoning human population. Now standing at 5.7 billion and growing at a rate of 1.6 percent
per year, the population of the world will double in 43 years if growth continues at this pace. By
draining wetlands, plowing prairies, logging forests, paving, and building, we are altering the landscape
on an unprecedented scale. Some organisms do well under the conditions we've created: They tend to
cope well with change, tolerate a broad range of habitats, disperse widely, and reproduce rapidly, and
they can quickly crowd out more specialized local species. City pigeons, zebra mussels, rats, and kudzu
and tamarisk trees -- these are examples of what biologists call "weedy" species, both animals and
plants. Many weedy species will probably survive, and even thrive, in the face of the current mass
extinction. But thousands of others, many never known to science, are likely to perish.
 And what is the fate of our own species likely to be, if we really are in the midst of a sixth mass
extinction? One possibility is that as diversity and abundance wither, the species causing it all --  Homo
sapiens, the most dominant species in history -- could also be on the road to oblivion. But another
possibility is that Homo sapiens, which has proved to be a very effective weedy species itself, will
persist. That's the view of paleobiologist David Jablonski, who sees us as one of the survivors, "sort of
picking through the rubble" of a world that has lost much of its biodiversity -- and much of its comfort.
For along with that species richness, the ecosystem is likely to loose much of its ability to provide many
of the valuable services that we take for granted, from cleaning and recirculating air and water, to
pollinating crops and providing a source for new pharmaceuticals. And while the fossil record tells us
that biodiversity has always recovered, it also tells us that the recovery will be unbearably slow in
human terms -- 5 to 10 million years after the mass extinctions of the past. That's more than 200,000
generations of humankind before levels of biodiversity comparable to those we inherited might be
restored.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/03/2/l_032_04.html

PROCESS QUESTIONS:
1. Describe the rate at which we are currently losing species. How did we get such rate?
 ARTICLE 2: Species dying out 1,000 times faster with humans on the scene

The world is on the brink of a sixth great extinction of species, a new study says. Species of animals and plants
are currently dying out at least 1,000 times faster than they would without human interference.

Before humanity became dominant on earth, an average of one species per 10 million became extinct each
year. But now between 100 and 1,000 per million cease to exist annually, says a study by a group of authors
led by biologist Stuart Pimm of Duke University.

"We are on the verge of the sixth extinction," Pimm said. "Whether we avoid it or not will depend on our
actions."
The biologists estimated prehistoric extinction rates based on molecular phylogeny, a technique that tracks
relationships between different species through similarities and differences in their DNA. Phylogenic trees
charted this way gave them an upper limit on background extinction, which they could then compare to
modern extinction data.

The latter was also an estimate, because we don’t really know exactly how many species exist, with scientists
describing only about 1.9 million out of as many as 11 million that are probably living on earth.

The findings didn’t come as much of a surprise. Previous studies indicated that extinction rates are now higher
than they used to be, but they put the number at the lower range of what Pimm and his colleagues suggest.

The prime factor behind the high death rate is the shrinkage of natural habitats, the study published on
Thursday by the journal Science says. Our less intelligent cohabitants find themselves with no place to live, as
we take over and change environments to our benefit.

Other factors are the introduction of alien species into habitats thanks to human activity, climate change and
unsustainable consumption by humans.

But despite the bad news, the research is "optimistic," Pimm told LiveScience, and there is hope for preserving
biodiversity.

"Although things are bad, and this paper shows that they're actually worse than we thought they were, we are
in a much better position to do something about that," he said.
New technology, like satellite imaging, dedicated smartphone apps and social networks, combined with the
effort by citizen scientists are allowing conservationists to help species in trouble better than ever before.

Scientists have evidence of five major extinction events in the past, in which large amounts of species
disappeared due to a rapid, often catastrophic environmental change. The worst of them happened some 252
million years ago and wiped out up to 96 percent of marine species and 70 percent of terrestrial vertebrate
species. The cause is not known for certain, with a meteor impact, massive volcanic activity, depletion of
oxygen in oceanic water and other possible hypotheses being discussed.

https://www.rt.com/news/162572-species-great-extinction-humans/
 ARTICLE 3: The Extinction of Animal and Plant Species - The Planet's First-ever Mass-
Extinction Precipitated by a Biotic Agent: Humans

Should we be alarmed at the current massive die-offs being noted in the animal and plant kingdoms? After all,
new species arise and old species die off all the time. Its just nature taking its course, right? Not necessarily.
The Earth is now entering the sixth mass extinction event in its four-billion-year history, but what’s different
about this die-off is that this is the only such event precipitated by a biotic agent: humans.

The extinction numbers far outweigh the emergence of new species. From a purely selfish perspective,
humans should be very concerned. Since we haven’t terraformed Mars yet, we still need a livable ecosystem
on this planet in order to survive. As mass extinction occurs, experts say that we end up dealing with serious
consequences. Recently, a team of scientists have discovered new information, that indicates things are worse
than we previously thought.

“There’s no question that we are in a mass extinction spasm right now,” said David Wake, professor of
integrative biology at UC Berkeley. “Amphibians have been around for about 250 million years. They made it
through when the dinosaurs didn’t. The fact that they’re cutting out now should be a lesson for us.”

A recent study supported by The National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health, found that
nearly all of the amphibian species that inhabit the peaks of the Sierra Nevada are threatened. Wake and
Vance Vredenburg, research associate at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology at UC Berkeley and assistant
professor of biology at San Francisco State University discovered that for two of these species, the Sierra
Nevada Yellow-legged Frog and the Southern Yellow-legged Frog, populations over the last few years declined
by 95 to 98 percent, even in highly protected areas such as Yosemite National Park. This means that each local
frog population has dwindled to 2 to 5 percent of its former size! Originally, frogs living atop the highest, most
remote peaks seemed to thrive, but recently, they are also dying off.

Biological Annihilation on Earth Accelerating? Population Extinctions, Entire Animal Species Destroyed

In an article published online this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the
researchers argue that substantial die-offs of amphibians and other plant and animal species force us to
accept that a new mass extinction is facing the planet.

Frogs are certainly not the only victims in this mass extinction, Wake noted. Many other scientists studying
other organisms are discovering similarly dramatic effects.

Over 10,000 scientists in the World Conservation Union have compiled data showing that currently 51 per cent
of known reptiles, 52 per cent of known insects, and 73 per cent of known flowering plants are in danger along
with many mammals, birds and amphibians. It is likely that some species will become extinct before they are
even discovered, before any medicinal use or other important features can be assessed. The cliché movie plot
where the cure for cancer is about to be annihilated is more real than anyone would like to imagine.

“Our work needs to be seen in the context of all this other work, and the news is very, very grim,” Wake said.

As of yet, there is no consensus among the scientific community about when exactly the current mass
extinction started, notes Wake. It may have been 10,000 years ago, when humans first came from Asia to the
Americas and hunted many of the large mammals to extinction. It may have started after the Industrial
Revolution, when the human population exploded. Or, we might be seeing the start of it right now. But
whatever the start date, empirical data clearly show that extinction rates have dramatically increased over the
last few decades.

Peter Raven, past President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, states in the
foreword to their publication AAAS Atlas of Population and Environment, “We have driven the rate of
biological extinction, the permanent loss of species, up several hundred times beyond its historical levels, and
are threatened with the loss of a majority of all species by the end of the 21st century.”

The causes of biocide are a hodge-podge of human environmental “poisons” which often work synergistically,
including a vast array of pollutants and pesticides that weaken immunity and make plants and animals more
susceptible to microbial and fungal infections, human induced climate change, habitat loss from agriculture
and urban sprawl, invasions of exotic species introduced by humans, illegal and legal wildlife trade, light
pollution, and man-made borders among other many other causes.

Is there a way out? The answer is yes and no. We’ll never regain the lost biodiversity-at least not within a
fathomable time period, but there are ways to help prevent what many experts believe is a coming worldwide
bio collapse. The eminent Harvard biologist Edward O Wilson has wisely noted that the time has come to start
calling the “environmentalist view” the “real-world view”. We can’t ignore reality simply because it doesn’t
conform nicely within convenient boundaries and moneymaking strategies. After all, what good will all of our
conveniences do for us, if we keep generating them in ways that collectively destroy the necessities of life?

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-extinction-of-animal-and-plant-species/12965

PROCESS QUESTIONS OF ARTICLE 2 and 3:

1. In general, why do species go extinct?

2. Why does extinction matter?

3. What are the effects of climate change on the environment? To living

things?

4. Why is climate change said to be driving the current mass extinction?

5. Can species easily adapt to climate change? Support your answer with data
from the readings.

6. Can we prevent mass extinction? Explain.

 ARTICLE 4: Climate Change Threatens Genetic Diversity, Future of World’s
Caribou
Scientists looked at reservoirs of genetic diversity in caribou and whether that diversity was linked to stable
habitats. They found that caribou populations in the most climatically stable areas had the greatest genetic
diversity and note that future climate forecasts bode ill for both caribou habitat and their genes.
"Caribou can respond to habitat change in three ways," said Kris Hundertmark, co-author and wildlife
biologist-geneticist at the Institute of Arctic Biology at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. "They can move to
new, suitable habitat, adapt to the changed habitat or die."
Caribou populations are predicted to become more isolated and fragmented as climate change shrinks habitat
and as caribou have fewer opportunities for genes to flow between individuals and herds, explained
Hundertmark.
"When a population loses genetic diversity, they lose the ability to adapt to change," Hundertmark said,
adding that although Alaska herds are expected to fair slightly better at least in the near future, they are still
facing significant challenges.
"Climate change in Alaska means we're going to see more fires and while that's good for moose, it's really bad
for caribou," said Hundertmark, "because it's going to burn lichen beds that can take at least 50 years to
recover and reduce viable caribou habitat."
Hundertmark and then-graduate student Karen Mager who collected 655 tissues samples from 20 of Alaska's
32 herds developed genetic profiles of Alaska's caribou. The two credit a successful collaboration with state
and federal fish and game biologists and hunters over several years with making sample collection possible.
The scientists, part of a team headed by researchers at Laval University in Quebec, used climate
reconstructions from 21,000 years ago to the present to predict where caribou habitat would likely exist and
they matched reservoirs of high genetic diversity to areas with the most stable habitat over time.
Bolstered by the success of their retrospective analysis the scientists forecast caribou habitat to the year 2080
using a 'business-as-usual' climate model -- the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's A1B model. The
outcome is grim.
"Those caribou herds that shift their range to remain within their habitat and those herds that are reduced in
size and become isolated from neighboring herds are those most threatened with loss of genetic diversity,"
said Hundertmark. "That is why it is important to know what areas will be have the most habitat stability in
the future." The team predicts that viable caribou habitat will shift north, the southernmost herds will
disappear and herds in northeastern North America will become more threatened with extinction, losing up to
89% of their current habitat.
Caribou in western North America will also be affected, although to a lesser extent, and have a better chance
of retaining what remains of genetic diversity and therefore adaptability to change.
"This study gives us strong evidence from a widespread species that the stability of the climate makes a
difference in the amount of genetic diversity retained within a species," said Mager.

Process Questions:

1. Discuss the major environmental threats to the caribou.

2. How does climate change affect genetic diversity?

ARTICLE 5: Evidence of mass extinction associated with climate change 375 million years ago
discovered in Central Asia

"The Late Devonian mass extinction was one of the five largest mass extinction events in the history of life,"
said Professor Johnny Waters, who is a co-leader of the five-year, U.N. International Geoscience Programme
project that began in 2011. The research team, which includes Assistant Professor Sarah Carmichael, is
examining the relationship between climate change and changes in the ecosystems in the Devonian period,
from 419 to 359 million years ago.

"This is the third most significant mass extinction and it was caused by plants," Waters said. "Unlike the
dinosaur mass extinction, which was related to an asteroid impact, this one was environmentally related."

In the Devonian period, Waters explained, the world was experiencing super greenhouse climate conditions.
This means that it was very warm, there probably were no ice caps, there was a lot carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere (with estimates of 4,000 parts per million).

"As plant communities expanded onto land to form the first forests, they depleted the carbon dioxide (CO2)
that was in the atmosphere," Waters said. "CO2 levels dropped to 400 ppm toward the end of the Devonian. It
got colder. There were glaciation events and the rapid change in the climate caused severe extinction in the
tropics and the existing coral reefs became extinct." By comparison, the world's current CO2 level is very close
to 400 ppm.

Most of the knowledge that geologists have about this mass extinction comes from North America and
Europe. Although these two land masses are far apart now, in the Devonian they were very close to each
other. Scientists have tried to make inferences about worldwide events based on sample locations that are
really quite limited in terms of their geographic history, or paleogeography. Therefore, it is vitally important to
obtain samples from locations outside this region for understanding global climate change during this time
period.

Waters' international team of geoscientists has conducted field work in remote areas of western China for
many years, in addition to two recent field seasons in western Mongolia near the Russian and Chinese
borders. The changing political climate in China, Russia and Mongolia in recent years has now made it possible
to do fieldwork in these locations. The strength of these field collaborations is that they draw on the expertise
of scientists from a variety of disciplines to add critical climatic information to a limited database. U.N.
researchers associated with this project are also collecting related data in Thailand, Myanmar, Vietnam and
Northern China.

"The reason we are working in central Asia is that there is a lot of good evidence of what happened at and
after this mass extinction -- this is an area that has not been well studied," Waters said. "It's all a part of our
work finding the places that give us the best information in sorting out what happened in the extinction event
and in its aftermath."

Answers about Earth's climate during and after this mass extinction are contained within rock samples from
these new field sites, which were once part of the ocean floor, as geochemical signals preserved in the rocks
record devastating climate change. The paleogeography of the field sites indicate that Devonian climate
change not only had environmental impacts on life associated with large land masses, but also on life in the
open ocean.

"We now have evidence that the radiation of surviving life following the mass extinction was centered in
Central Asia," Waters said.

The geochemistry of the samples is being analyzed primarily by students in Appalachian's Department of
Geology under Carmichael's supervision, with additional analyses being conducted at UNC-Chapel Hill and a
university in Austria. "We are using geochemistry to tie it all together all across Central Asia, which used to be
an open ocean, and compare our new data to established sequences in Europe and North America, in order to
develop a global understanding of the climate change associated with this mass extinction," Waters said.

"Today we are looking at increases in carbon dioxide causing warming and the negative impacts to the
ecosystem. In the Devonian period, we are looking at a rapid loss of carbon dioxide, which in geologic time
occurred over millions of years rather than hundreds of years," Waters said. "But the lessons are actually quite
similar. We clearly are concerned today about climate change and its impact on the environment and its effect
on the ecosystem, and the geologic record is really the only record where we can see these events and
compare what happened before and after."

Waters and Carmichael will present the preliminary results of their research at the Geological Society of
America's Annual Meeting in Denver in October and at the American Geophysical Union's annual meeting in
San Francisco in December.

Next summer, Waters will lead a 20-member team, including Dr. Sarah Carmichael and two students from
Appalachian's Department of Geology, for continued field work in Mongolia.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131213092841.htm

PROCESS QUESTIONS:

1. Discuss the impact of climate change on extinction. Support your discussion

with evidences.