Abstract
Purpose
There has been an increasing number of studies on species extinction because of global warming based on estimations of changes in species distributions. Life cycle impact assessment methods do not have a biodiversity damage factor for global warming that uses the extinction risk index. In this study, a method for determining the extinction risks of individual species per unit CO2 emission was proposed and test calculations of the extinction risks of 216 species of Japanese vascular plants were performed. We also examined the possibility of determining local and global extinction risk factors using this method.
Methods
This method uses the Expected Increase in the Number of Extinction Species (EINES), which is defined as the inverse of the time to extinction, as the extinction risk index. Procedures for determining the extinction risks of individual species per unit CO2 emission (EINES/species/kg) are as follows. First, based on the base scenario of CO2 emission, a niche-based species distribution model is used to estimate species distribution areas in 2000 and 2100 and calculate the distribution area decrease over 100 years. The number of years before the zero distribution area is then determined by assuming that the decrease is constant. Extinction risk is defined as the inverse of this time. The final step is to determine the extinction risk at specific CO2 emissions in addition to the base emission scenario and divide the difference in the extinction risk by the additional amount of CO2 emissions.
Results and discussion
The distribution areas of 216 species of Japanese vascular plants having southern distribution limits were estimated to decrease by 40–85% in 100 years. The accuracy of the estimation was sufficient according to the value of area under the curve (AUC). Considering climate models and migration conditions, the extinction risk per unit CO2 emission was estimated between −0.6 × 10−18 and 4.7 × 10−18 (EINES/species/kg). We converted the normalization values of the extinction risk of Japan for the 216 species to compare impact of land use changes and waste processing with that of global warming on the species. We found that global warming has smaller impact compared with land use changes and larger impact compared with waste processing.
Conclusions
A method for estimating the extinction risks of species per unit CO2 emission was proposed, and it can be used to determine the local and global extinction risk factors of CO2.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.References
Arrhenius O (1921) Species and area. J Ecol 9:95–99
Azevedo LB, van Zelm R, Hendriks AJ, Bobbink R, Huijbregts MAJ (2013) Global assessment of the effects of terrestrial acidification on plant species richness. Environ Pollut 174:10–15
CBD (2010) Global Biodiversity Outlook 3. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montréal
Curran M, de Baan L, de Schryver AM, van Zelm R, Hellweg S, Koellner T, Sonnemann G, Huijbregts MAJ (2011) Toward meaningful end points of biodiversity in life cycle assessment. Environ Sci Technol 45:70–79
de Baan L, Alkemade R, Koellner T (2013) Land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA: a global approach. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18:1216–1230
de Schryver AM, Brakkee KW, Goedkoop MJ, Huijbregts MA (2009) Characterization factors for global warming in life cycle assessment based on damages to humans and ecosystems. Environ Sci Technol 43(6):1689–1695
Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL (eds) (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA
GBIF Science Committee (2014) Science review: compiling the year’s research uses of data accessed through the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, from http://www.gbif.org/system/files_force/gbif_resource/resource-82191/sr14-final-web.pdf. Accessed 20 Apr 2015
Giovanelli JGR, Siqueira MF, Haddad CFB, Alexandrino J (2010) Modeling a spatially restricted distribution in the Neotropics: how the size of calibration area affects the performance of five presence-only methods. Ecol Model 221:215–224
Goedkoop MJ, Spriensma R (1999) The eco-indicator 99: a damage oriented method for life cycle impact assessment methodology. PRé Consultants BV, Amersfoort
Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1982) The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29–36
Horikawa Y (1972) Atlas of the Japanese Flora, an introduction to plant sociology of East Asia. Gakken, Tokyo, pp 1–500
Horikawa Y (1976) Atlas of the Japanese Flora, an introduction to plant sociology of East Asia. Gakken, Tokyo, pp 501–862
Itsubo N, Sakagami M, Kuriyama K, Inaba A (2012) Statistical analysis for the development of national average weighting factors—visualization of the variability between each individual’s environmental thoughts. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:488–498
Japan Meteorological Agency (1996) Observation climatic data (CD-ROM). Japan Meteorological Business Support Center, Tokyo
Japan Meteorological Agency (2002) Mesh climatic data 2000 (CD-ROM). Japan Meteorological Business Support Center, Tokyo
Jeanneret P, Baumgartner DU, Freiermuth Knuchel R, Koch B, Gaillard G (2014) An expert system for integrating biodiversity into agricultural life-cycle assessment. Ecol Indic 46:224–231
Kira T (1977) A climatological interpretation of Japanese vegetation zones. In: Miyawaki A, Tuexen R (eds) Vegetation science and environmental protection. Maruzen, Tokyo, pp 21–30
Matsuda H, Serizawa S, Ueda K, Kato T, Yahara T (2003) Extinction risk assessment of vascular plants in the 2005 World Exposition, Japan. Chemosphere 53(4):325–336
Metz CE (1978) Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 8:283–298
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC
Nakicenovic N, Swart R (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios: a special report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Olsson PA, Mårtensson LM, Bruun HH (2009) Acidification of sandy grasslands—consequences for plant diversity. Appl Veg Sci 12:350–361
Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds) (2007) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press
Pennington DW, Chomkhamsri K, Pant R, Wolf M, Bidoglio G, Kögler K, Misiga P, Sponar M, Lorz B, Sonnemann G, Masoni P, Wang H, Ling L, Castanho C, Soon C, Fieschi M, Filareto A, Hauschild M (2010) ILCD handbook public consultation workshop. International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD). Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(3):231–237
Pereira HM, Leadley PW, Proença V, Alkemade R, Scharlemann JPW et al (2010) Scenarios for global biodiversity in the 21st century. Science 330:1496–1501
Phillips SJ, Dudík M, Schapire RE (2004) A maximum entropy approach to species distribution modeling. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Conference on Machine Learning, pp 655–662
Rosenzweig ML (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press
Souza DM, Flynn DFB, Declerck F, Rosenbaum R, Lisboa HM, Koellner T (2013) Land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA: proposal of characterization factors based on functional diversity. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(6):1188–1202
Souza DM, TeixDeira RFM, Ostermann O (2015) Assessing biodiversity loss due to land use with life cycle assessment: are we there yet? Glob Change Biol 21:32–47
Swets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293
Thomas CD, Cameron A, Green RE, Bakkenes M, Beaumont LJ, Collingham YC, Erasmus BFN, Ferreira de Siqueira M, Grainger A (2004) Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427(6970):145–147
Thuiller W, Lavorel S, Araujo MB, Sykes MT, Colin PI (2005) Climate change threats to plant diversity in Europe. PNAS 102(23):8245–8250
Yahara T, Kato T, Inoue K, Yokota M, Kadono Y, Serizawa S, Takahashi H, Kawakubo N, Nagamasu H, Suzuki K, Ueda K, Kadota Y (1998) Red list of Japanese vascular plants: summary of methods and results. In: Proceedings of the Japanese Society of Plant Taxonomists 1998, 13, 89–96
Wigley TML (2008) MAGICC/SCENGEN 5.3: user manual (version 2), from http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/wigley/magicc/UserMan5.3.v2.pdf. Accessed 8 Apr 2014
Wisz MS, Hijmans RJ, Li J, Peterson AT, Graham CH, Guisan A (2008) NCEAS Predicting Species Distributions Working Group. Divers Distrib 14:763–773
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible editor: Masaharu Motoshita
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(DOCX 335 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tang, L., Higa, M., Tanaka, N. et al. Assessment of global warming impact on biodiversity using the extinction risk index in LCIA: a case study of Japanese plant species. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23, 314–323 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1319-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1319-6