Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Science Aau1758
Science Aau1758
M
though somewhat weaker, driver of temperature
also experienced rapid warming (>0.2°C per de- variability (37, 38) and interact with life history this time period to minimize extrapolation to
cade) (Fig. 2A). This interaction likely arises and climate variability to increase the likelihood temperatures cooler or warmer than those used
through several mechanisms. First, fishing can of population collapse (39). Thus, overfishing has in model fitting (figs. S24 and S25). We estimate
truncate age distributions (33) and select for reduced the resilience of populations to climate that the combined MSY from the 235 populations
earlier maturation or reduced body sizes (34), change, and climate change will likely hinder decreased by 4.1% (1.4 million metric tons), from
both of which can decrease reproductive output efforts to rebuild overfished populations (40). 35.2 million metric tons in 1930 to 1939 to 33.8
(35). Fishing can also reduce intraspecific diversity, We used the model estimates of temperature million metric tons in 2001 to 2010 (Fig. 3A). The
alter species interactions, and damage habitat influence, intrinsic rate of increase, and carrying 95% confidence interval for this trend ranged
(36). As a result, overfishing can magnify fluc- capacity along with historical temperature data from a 9.0% decline to a 0.3% increase, indicating
tuations in abundance due to environmental to hindcast MSY from 1930 to 2010. We chose much stronger support for declining productivity
Fig. 1. Influence of
warming on fisheries
productivity. Distribution
of temperature influences
estimated by (A) the final
model and (B) the null
model. Examples of
populations where
historical ocean warming
(C) increased productivity
(black sea bass in the
during this period. Losses from populations re- in recruitment potential (fig. S27) (14), suggest- evaluated populations. For example, we found
sponding negatively to warming outweighed ing that climate effects on the other components that 162 fish populations (10.6%) in the much
gains from those responding positively because of productivity—somatic growth and natural more complete Food and Agriculture Organiza-
negatively responding populations constituted mortality—may be strong enough to offset effects tion (FAO) landings database (1) exhibit the char-
a larger biomass (Fig. 3, B and C). The greatest on recruitment. However, declines in North Sea acteristics associated with a negative effect of
losses in productivity occurred in the Sea of fisheries productivity are consistent with studies warming on productivity—that is, they are over-
Japan, North Sea, Iberian Coastal, Kuroshio showing declines in forage fish (24) and ground- fished, have experienced warming, and are at the
Current, and Celtic-Biscay Shelf ecoregions, where- fish (25) productivity induced by ocean warming. warm ends of their thermal niches (figs. S28 to
as the greatest gains occurred in the Labrador- Declines in East Asian fisheries productivity are S30). This proportion is comparable to the pro-
Newfoundland, Baltic Sea, Indian Ocean, and consistent with single-species studies document- portion of data-rich populations that have ex-
Northeast U.S. Shelf ecoregions (Fig. 4 and table S4). ing negative climate impacts in the region (43), perienced a negative influence of historical
The East Asian ecoregions experienced some of the though community-scale studies suggest that de- warming (8%) (Fig. 1A). Region-specific studies
largest warming-driven declines in MSY (8 to 34%) clining predator productivity may be balanced by are necessary to better understand the impacts
and support some of the largest and fastest- corresponding increases in prey productivity (44). of warming on important but poorly described
growing human populations in the world (41). Our study is limited in three ways. First, we fisheries, especially those of tropical developing
Our results present a new map of “winning” evaluated only the influence of temperature on nations. Lastly, the use of population model out-
and “losing” ecosystems under ocean warming productivity, though other factors such as chang- put as data has been criticized because of dif-
(Fig. 4). Studies that project fisheries productivity ing primary production, dissolved oxygen, pH, ficulties in accounting for model assumptions,
under future emissions scenarios often predict and habitat availability may also be influential uncertainty, and bias in post hoc analyses (46).
increases in productivity at the poles and de- (45). Progress in the development of global his- We addressed these concerns by following best
creases at the equator (10, 11, 42). We see no evi- torical datasets for environmental variables other practices for stock assessment meta-analysis (47)
dence for this prediction over the observed time than temperature would enable more compre- and by explicitly confirming that the results were
period (Fig. 4 and figs. S16, S18, and S26), sug- hensive investigations in the future. Second, not influenced by the methods of the source pop-
Fig. 3. Hindcast of temperature-dependent MSY. MSY hindcasts are shown (A) for all populations and for populations with (B) significant
positive, (C) significant negative, and (D) nonsignificant influences of temperature on productivity. Solid lines indicate the median MSY estimates,
shading indicates the 95% confidence intervals, and dashed lines show MSY at average temperature. mt, metric tons. (E) The mean global
sea surface temperature (SST) anomaly from 1850 to 2015.
Fig. 4. Percent change in mean MSY between the period from 1930 of populations in each ecoregion is shown inside the point. Dashed
monotonic influence of warming on production 7. C. Deutsch, A. Ferrel, B. Seibel, H. O. Pörtner, R. B. Huey, 35. D. R. Barneche, D. R. Robertson, C. R. White, D. J. Marshall,
(i.e., warming could only increase or decrease Science 348, 1132–1135 (2015). Science 360, 642–645 (2018).
8. C. A. Stock et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114, 36. B. Planque et al., J. Mar. Syst. 79, 403–417 (2010).
productivity for a given population). However, E1441–E1449 (2017). 37. C.-H. Hsieh et al., Nature 443, 859–862 (2006).
the aerobic performance of individual fish is dome 9. W. W. L. Cheung, G. Reygondeau, T. L. Frölicher, Science 354, 38. A. O. Shelton, M. Mangel, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108,
shaped [it increases as temperatures warm toward 1591–1594 (2016). 7075–7080 (2011).
some thermal optimum but decreases once tem- 10. J. L. Blanchard et al., Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London Ser. B 367, 39. M. L. Pinsky, D. Byler, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 282,
2979–2989 (2012). 20151053 (2015).
peratures exceed this optimum (30)] and is likely 11. M. Barange et al., Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 211–216 (2014). 40. G. L. Britten, M. Dowd, L. Kanary, B. Worm, Nat. Commun. 8,
to remain dome shaped at the population scale 12. J. K. Moore et al., Science 359, 1139–1143 (2018). 15325 (2017).
through cumulative impacts on growth, mortality, 13. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),
41. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs
and recruitment (48). Populations identified as “Climate change 2013: The physical science basis.
(UN-DESA), “World population prospects: The 2017 revision,
Contribution to the fifth assessment report of the
responding positively to warming are thus un- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” (Cambridge
key findings and advance tables” (Working paper no. ESA/P/
likely to maintain productivity gains as continued WP/248, UN-DESA, 2017).
Univ. Press, 2013).
42. W. W. L. Cheung et al., Global Change Biol. 16, 24–35
warming (13, 49) drives these populations past 14. G. L. Britten, M. Dowd, B. Worm, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
(2010).
their thermal optima (see Atlantic cod and herr- 113, 134–139 (2016).
43. H. K. Cha, S. Jung, J. Mar. Sci. Technol. 21, 15–22 (2013).
15. P. A. Larkin, Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 106, 1–11 (1977).
ing in Fig. 2C). 16. K. D. Friedland et al., PLOS ONE 7, e28945 (2012).
44. C. S. Szuwalski, M. G. Burgess, C. Costello, S. D. Gaines,
As the world’s human population and demand Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114, 717–721 (2017).
17. J. J. Pella, P. K. Tomlinson, Inter Am. Trop. Tuna Comm. Bull.
for seafood have grown (1), ocean warming has 13, 421–454 (1969). 45. K. M. Brander, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 19709–19714
18. M. Ishii, A. Shouji, S. Sugimoto, T. Matsumoto, Int. J. Climatol. (2007).
driven declines in marine fisheries productivity 46. E. N. Brooks, J. J. Deroba, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 72, 634–641
25, 865–879 (2005).
and the potential for sustainable fisheries catches. 19. D. Ricard, C. Minto, O. P. Jensen, J. K. Baum, Fish Fish. 13, (2015).
Simultaneously, overfishing has compromised the 380–398 (2012). 47. J. T. Thorson et al., Fish Fish. 16, 342–361 (2013).
resilience of many marine fish and invertebrate 20. Materials and methods are available as supplementary 48. K. F. Drinkwater et al., J. Mar. Syst. 79, 374–388
materials. (2010).
populations to climate change. However, prompt 49. A. E. Raftery, A. Zimmer, D. M. W. Frierson, R. Startz, P. Liu,
21. H. Akaike, IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr. 19, 716–723
improvements in fisheries management could (1974). Nat. Clim. Chang. 7, 637–641 (2017).
maintain fisheries yields and profits into the 22. F. J. Mueter et al., Prog. Oceanogr. 81, 93–110 (2009). 50. RAM Legacy Stock Assessment Database;
future (32). Thus, preventing overfishing and de- 23. A. J. Richardson, D. S. Schoeman, Science 305, 1609–1612 www.ramlegacy.org.
(2004). 51. COBE sea surface temperature dataset; www.esrl.noaa.gov/
veloping management strategies that are robust psd/data/gridded/data.cobe.html.
24. L. W. Clausen, A. Rindorf, M. van Deurs, M. Dickey-Collas,
to temperature-driven changes in productivity N. T. Hintzen, J. Appl. Ecol. 51, 45 (2017). 52. C. M. Free, sst_productivity, GitHub; https://github.com/
are essential if society is to maintain and re- 25. G. Beaugrand, K. M. Brander, J. Alistair Lindley, S. Souissi, cfree14/sst_productivity.
build the capacity for global wild-capture fisheries P. C. Reid, Nature 426, 661–664 (2003).
26. B. R. MacKenzie, F. W. Köster, Ecology 85, 784–794 AC KNOWLED GME NTS
to supply food and support livelihoods in a warm-
(2004). We are grateful for the hard work of the many scientists who
ing ocean. 27. V. Bartolino et al., Fish. Oceanogr. 23, 258–269 have contributed to the RAM Legacy Stock Assessment
(2014). Database and to C. Hofmann, S. Coffen-Smout, D. Keith,
RE FE RENCES AND N OT ES 28. A. D. Rijnsdorp, M. A. Peck, G. H. Engelhard, C. Möllmann, S. MacConnachie, and P. Neubauer for their contributions to
1. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), “The state of world J. K. Pinnegar, ICES J. Mar. Sci. 66, 1570–1583 (2009). the corresponding stock boundary database. We thank
fisheries and aquaculture 2016” (Food and Agriculture 29. V. S. Saba et al., J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 121, 118–132 J. Wilkin and E. Hunter for discussions regarding temperature
Organization of the United Nations, 2016). (2016). datasets. We also thank J. Deroba, M. Roswell, and members
2. H. C. J. Godfray et al., Science 327, 812–818 (2010). 30. H. O. Pörtner, R. Knust, Science 315, 95–97 (2007). of the Jensen and Pinsky labs for valuable discussions and
3. S. Manabe, R. J. Stouffer, Nature 364, 215–218 (1993). 31. A. L. Perry, P. J. Low, J. R. Ellis, J. D. Reynolds, Science 308, feedback while we were working on this paper. Lastly, we are
4. R. E. Keeling, A. Körtzinger, N. Gruber, Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci. 2, 1912–1915 (2005). grateful to E. Ward, J. Hastie, M. McClure, and four anonymous
199–229 (2010). 32. S. D. Gaines et al., Sci. Adv. 4, o1378 (2018). reviewers for providing constructive comments on the
5. L. Bopp et al., Biogeosciences 10, 6225–6245 (2013). 33. L. A. K. Barnett, T. A. Branch, R. A. Ranasinghe, T. E. Essington, manuscript. Funding: We acknowledge support from NSF
6. M. L. Pinsky, B. Worm, M. J. Fogarty, J. L. Sarmiento, Curr. Biol. 27, 2843–2848.e2 (2017). OCE-1426891 and DEB-1616821 and from an Alfred P. Sloan
S. A. Levin, Science 341, 1239–1242 (2013). 34. E. M. Olsen et al., Nature 428, 932–935 (2004). fellowship. C.M.F. was supported by an NMFS–Sea Grant
Population Dynamics fellowship. This publication (NJSG-18-939) discussed the analysis and results and contributed to writing SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
is also the result of research sponsored by the New Jersey Sea the manuscript. Competing interests: O.P.J. and J.W. are www.sciencemag.org/content/363/6430/979/suppl/DC1
Grant Consortium (NJSGC) with funds from the National members of the Scientific and Statistical committees for the Materials and Methods
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office of Sea Mid-Atlantic and New England Fishery Management councils, Supplementary Text
Grant, U.S. Department of Commerce, under NOAA grant respectively. M.L.P. serves as an Oceana science advisor and Figs. S1 to S30
NA13OAR4170114 and the NJSGC. The statements, findings, is a visiting research collaborator at Princeton University and Tables S1 to S8
conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors a guest researcher at the University of Oslo. Data and References (53–71)
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NJSGC or the materials availability: The raw data for both the RAM Legacy Appendices A to G
U.S. Department of Commerce. Author contributions: O.P.J., Database (50) and COBE sea surface temperature dataset
M.L.P., J.T.T., and C.M.F. conceptualized the analysis. C.M.F. (51) are publicly available. All of the processed data are 28 July 2018; accepted 9 January 2019
performed the analysis and wrote the manuscript. All authors available on GitHub (52). 10.1126/science.aau1758
Science (ISSN 1095-9203) is published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 1200 New York Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20005. The title Science is a registered trademark of AAAS.
Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim
to original U.S. Government Works