Climatic Change

, Volume 68, Issue 1–2, pp 199–218 | Cite as

Interactions between Habitat Loss and Climate Change: Implications for Fairy Shrimp in the Central Valley Ecoregion of California, Usa

  • Christopher R. PykeEmail author


Combinations of habitat loss and climate change can alter the distribution of environmental conditions available to organisms. The magnitude and direction of these changes may have important implications for ecological processes and species persistence. This study explored the potential impacts of projected changes in climate and land-use for five fairy shrimp species (Crustacea: Anostraca) endemic to vernal pools in the Central Valley ecoregion of California, U.S.A. Scenarios describing habitat extent and climate were developed for 2040 and 2100 and compared to a 1990’s baseline. Hydrologic conditions in vernal pools were found to be sensitive to projected climate changes, and, in the absence of habitat loss, warmer temperatures and greater winter precipitation would drive vernal pools toward longer, more frequent periods of inundation. However, existing biological reserves for three of the five species are biased toward drier areas and if unprotected habitat were lost, the net change in hydrologic conditions would be reversed with remaining habitat providing shorter, less frequent inundations. Species with unbiased representation in reserves do not show this reversal, and they have predictable shifts in hydrologic conditions. These results demonstrate the importance of biologically and climatically representative reserve systems under climate change and habitat loss.


Hydrologic Condition Habitat Loss Winter Precipitation Project Climate Change Vernal Pool 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arnold, C. D. and Elliot, W. J.: 1996, ‘CLIGEN weather generator predictions of seasonal wet and dry spells in Uganda’, Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng.39, 969–972.Google Scholar
  2. Bachelet, D., Neilson, R. P., Lenihan, J. M. and Drapek, R. J.: 2001,‘Climate change effects on vegetation distribution and carbon budget in the United States’, Ecosystems4, 164–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baffaut, C., Nearing, M. A. and Nicks, A. D.: 1996, ‘Impact of CLIGEN parameters on WEPP-predicted average annual soil loss’, Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng.39, 447–457.Google Scholar
  4. Brendonck, L., Michels, E., de Meester, L. and Riddoch, B. J.: 2002, ‘Temporary pools are not “enemy-free”, Hydrobiologia486, 147–159.Google Scholar
  5. Carpenter, S.: 2002, ‘Ecological futures: Building an ecology of the long now’, Ecology83, 2069–2083.Google Scholar
  6. CDF-FRAP: 2002a, Development Projections (based on 1990 Census), California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Sacramento, CA.Google Scholar
  7. CDF-FRAP: 2002b, Management Landscape, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Sacramento, CA.Google Scholar
  8. Chapin III, F. S., Osvaldo, E. S. and Huber-Sannwald, E. (eds.): 2001, Global biodiversity in a changing environment: Scenarios for the 21st century, Ecological Studies, Vol. 152, Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Clark, J. et al.: 2001, ‘Ecological forecasts: An emerging imperative’, Science293, 657–660.Google Scholar
  10. Collinge, S. K.: 1996, ‘Ecological consequences of habitat fragmentation:Implications for landscape architecture and planning’, Landscape Urban Plan.36, 59–77.Google Scholar
  11. Daly, C. and Taylor, G.: 1998, California average monthly precipitation, 1961–1990, Water and Climate Center of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Portland, OR, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  12. Davis, F., Stoms, D., Bueno, M., Hollander, A. and Walsh, J.: 1995, Gap analysis of mainland California, ESRI, Redlands, CA.Google Scholar
  13. DeFries, R.: 2002. ‘Past and future sensitivity of primary production to human modification of the landscape’, Geophys. Res. Lett.29, 1132.Google Scholar
  14. Elliot, W. J., Scheele, D. L. and Hall, D. E.: 2000, The Forest Service WEPP Interfaces, ASAE Annual International Meeting, American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Milwaukee, WI.Google Scholar
  15. Eriksen, C. and Belk, D.: 1999, Fairy Shrimps of California’s Puddles, Pools, and Playas, Mad River Press, Eureka, CA.Google Scholar
  16. ESRI: 2001, Arc/Info, Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, CA.Google Scholar
  17. Foley, P.: 1994, ‘Predicting extinction times from environmental stochasticity and carrying capacity’, Conserv. Biol.8, 124–137.Google Scholar
  18. Franke, R.: 1982, ‘Smooth interpolation of scattered data by local thin plate splines’, Comput. Math. Appl.8, 273–281.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Gibbs, J.: 2000, ‘Wetland loss and biodiversity conservation’, Conserv. Biol.14, 314–317.Google Scholar
  20. Greenstein, B., Curran, H. and Pandolfi, J.: 1998, ‘Shifting ecological baselines and the demise of Acropora cervicornis in the western North Atlantic and Caribbean Province: A Pleistocene perspective’, Coral Reefs 17, 249–261.Google Scholar
  21. Hanski, I.: 1999, Metapopulation Ecology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  22. Helm, B. P.: 1998, ‘Biogeography of Eight Large Branchiopods Endemic to California’, in Witham, C. W., Bauder, E. T., Belk, D., Ferren Jr., W. R., and Ornduff, R. (eds.), Ecology, conservation, and management of vernal pool ecosystems, California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA.Google Scholar
  23. Holland, R. and Dains, V.: 1990, ‘The Edaphic Factor in Vernal Pool Vegetation’, in Ikeda, D., Schlising, R., Fuller, E., Janeway, L., and Woods, P. (eds.), Vernal pool plants – their habitat and biology, California State University, Chico, CA, pp. 31–49.Google Scholar
  24. Holland, R. F.: 1998, ‘Great Valley vernal pool distribution, photorevised 1996’, in Williams, C., Bauder, E., Belk, D., Ferren Jr., W. and Ornuff, R. (eds.), in Ecology, conservation, and management of vernal pool ecosystems—Proceedings from a 1996 conference. California Native Plants Society, Sacramento, CA, pp. 71–75.Google Scholar
  25. Hooge, P. N. and Eichenlaub, B.: 1997, Animal movement extension to Arcview, Alaska Science Center – Biological Science Office, U.S. Geological Survey, Anchorage, AK.Google Scholar
  26. Johnson, G. L., Hanson, C. L., Hardegree, S. P. and Ballard, E. B.: 1996, ‘Stochastic weather simulation: Overview and analysis of two commonly used models’, J. Appl. Meteorol.35, 1878–1896.Google Scholar
  27. Johnst, K. and Wissel, C.: 1997. ‘Extinction risk in a temporally correlated fluctuating environment’, Theor. Populat. Biol.52, 91–100.Google Scholar
  28. King, J., Simovich, M. and Brusca, R.: 1996, ‘Species richness, edemism and ecology of crustacean assemblages in northern California vernal pools’, Hydrobiologia328, 85–116.Google Scholar
  29. Lehtinen, R. M., Galatowitsch, S. M. and Tester, J. R.: 1999, ‘Consequencesof habitat loss and fragmentation for wetland amphibian assemblages’, Wetlands19, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miller, N. L., Bashford, K. E. and Strem, E.: 2001, Climate change sensitivity study of California hydrology: A report to the California Energy Commission, No. 49110, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA.Google Scholar
  31. Motulsky, H. and Christopoulos, A.: 2002, ‘Fitting dose response curves’, in Motulsky, H. and Christopoulos, A. (eds.), Fitting models to biological data using linear and nonlinear regression. A practical guide to curve fitting, GraphPad Software, Inc., Melbourne, Australia, pp. 1–53.Google Scholar
  32. Nemani, R. R. et al.: 2001. ‘Asymmetric warming over coastal California andits impact on the premium wine industry’, Climate Res.19, 25–34.Google Scholar
  33. Peterson, G. D., Cumming, G. S. and Carpenter, S.: 2003, ‘Scenario planning: A tool for conservation in an uncertain world’, Conserv. Biol.17, 358–366.Google Scholar
  34. Pyke, C. R.: 2002, Modeling Vernal Pool Hydrologic Regimes and Assessing Their Sensitivity to Climatic and Land-Use Change, Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA.Google Scholar
  35. Pyke, C. R.: in press, ‘Assessing climate change impacts on vernal pool ecosystems and endemic branchiopods’, Ecosystems Google Scholar
  36. Pyke, C. R.: 2004, ‘Simulations of vernal pool hydroregimes for two locations in California’, Ecol. Model 173, 109–127.Google Scholar
  37. Scott, J. M. et al.: 2001a, ‘Nature reserves: Do they capture the full range of America’s biological diversity?’ Ecol. Appl.11, 999–1007.Google Scholar
  38. Scott, J. M. et al.: 2001b, ‘Representation of natural vegetation in protected areas: capturing the geographic range’, Biodiversity and Conservation, 10, 1297–1301.Google Scholar
  39. Semenov, M. A. and Barrow, E. M.: 1997, ‘Use of a stochastic weather generator in the development of climate change scenarios’, Clim. Change 35, 397–414.Google Scholar
  40. Simovich, M. and Hathaway, S.: 1997, ‘Diversified bet-hedging as a reproductive strategy of some ephemeral pool anostracans (Branchiopoda)’, J. Crustacean Biol.17, 38–44.Google Scholar
  41. Synder, M. A., Bell, J. L., Sloan, L. C., Duffy, P. B. and Govindasamy, B.:2002, ‘Climate responses to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide for a climatically vulerable region’, Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, 1–4.Google Scholar
  42. Thornton, P. E. and Running, S. W.: 1999, ‘An improved algorithm for estimating incident daily solar radiation from measurements of temperature, humidity, and precipitation’, Agric. Forest Meteorol.93, 211–228.Google Scholar
  43. Thornton, P. E., Running, S. W. and White, M. A.: 1997, ‘Generating surfaces of daily meteorological variables over large regions of complex terrain’,J. Hydrol.190, 214–251.Google Scholar
  44. Tilman, D. et al.: 2001, ‘Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change’, Science292, 231–284.Google Scholar
  45. USFWS: 1994, ‘Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; determination of endangered status for the conservancy fairy shrimp, longhorn fairy shrimp, and the vernal pool tadpole shrimp; and threatened status for the vernal pool fairy shrimp’, Federal Register59, 48136–48153.Google Scholar
  46. USFWS: 2003, ‘Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; 90-day findingfor a petition to list the midvalley fairy shrimp as endangered’, Federal Register78, 22724–22727.Google Scholar
  47. Verdin, K. L. and Greenlee, S. K.: 1996, ‘Development of continental scale digital elevation models and extraction of hydrographic features’, in Third International Conference/Workshop On Integrating GIS and Environmental Modeling, National Centre for Geographic Information and Analysis, Santa Barbara, California, Santa Fe, New Mexico.Google Scholar
  48. Vitousek, P., Mooney, H., Lubchenco, J. and Melillo, J.: 1997, ‘Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems’, Science277, 494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilcox, C.: 2001, ‘Habitat size and isolation affect colonization of seasonal wetlands by predatory aquatic insects’, Israel J. Zool.47, 459–475.Google Scholar
  50. Wilks, D. S.: 1992, ‘Adapting stochastic weather generation algorithms for climate change studies’, Climate Change22, 67–84.Google Scholar
  51. Wimberly, M., Spies, T., Long, C. and Whitlock, C.: 2000, ‘Simulating historical variability in the amount of old forests in the Oregon Coast Range’, Conserv. Biol.14, 167–180.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Center for Ecological Analysis and SynthesisSanta BarbaraU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations