Sharp Declines in Staghorn Reefs

The Acropora reef or better known as the Staghorn reef, is a critical reef builder that has been around for nearly 50 million years, but their abundance is currently at an all time low. Staghorn has been a critical reef builder for almost 2 million years and has encountered numerous changes in the climate but none have had the same affect as the one we're currently in. Declining numbers of Staghorns is reason to worry because of the benefits they bring the environment and protection they provide for other reef animals. 

There have been several occurrences in recent history that has contributed the the destruction and decline in the Staghorn population. One issue has been the bleaching of coral reefs, specifically in the Caribbean Sea. This combined with diseases have wiped out the entire population in certain areas and caused steep declines in others. 

Another issue that lead to the mass destruction of the Staghorn population was the colonization of Australia by European countries. This isn't as recent as the bleaching situation that is currently destroying the Staghorns and other types of coral regardless, the shift in "land-use" made a lasting impact. The colonizing of Australia lead to many ships and traffic for the coral reefs surrounding the continent.  

Throughout history Staghorns have been able to survive because of their quick reproductive rates combined with their ability to regenerate broken parts. Typically, with the amount of climate change and destruction of reefs , this is when the reefs should be at their peek. However the current climate change has been so devastating that even reefs designed to withstand rapid changes are struggling. Climate change is affecting a wide range of species and taking down even the best equipped. 

This relates to the course because we have mentioned several times how important coral reefs are for multiple reasons. Issues like bleaching continue to rise and the majority of the issues have been man made. This is another example of the harmful impact humans are having on the environment. If population levels of this reef builder continues to decline than the rest of the coral reefs worldwide will also be affected leading to even more loss of life. 

I think there needs to be a stronger drive for environmental policies and restrictions to allow reefs and other marine life to regenerate. We are destroying our environment and depleting our natural resources at a dangerous rate. Governments and the public will continue to do so until we reach the point of no return and wonder why we didn't make changes sooner. We need to take signs like the decline of Staghorns as a cue that we need change. This reef has survived and prospered for over 50 million years, yet somehow we have managed to contribute to the steepest decline in its history.  

Staghorns are still commonly seen around the world and are present in the majority of reefs and continue to provide life and safety for marine life. Coral reefs are home to the majority of the marine population, the continued destruction and decline of coral builders like Staghorns could be detrimental to the environment and those who relay on it. 
  
Credit: Photo by Brigitte Sommer for ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies.
ARC Centre of Excellence in Coral Reef Studies. "Corals most important for building reefs are now in sharp decline." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 22 April 2016. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160422163142.htm>.

Clear-cutting destabilizes carbon in forest soils, study finds

A recent study from Dartmouth College indicates that the practice of clear-cutting, or depleting all of the trees in a given area, loosens up the soil in previously wooded areas and allows the carbon stored in the soil to enter the atmosphere much quicker than that of soil in a protected area. This impacts the environment because carbon is a leading factor in climate change today.


The methodology for collecting this data was relatively simple: the researchers at Dartmouth College collected soil from a recently clear-cut forest and soil from an older, generally untouched forest. The results showed that the forest that had remained untouched had significantly higher levels of carbon retention than that of the clear-cut forest, allowing the researchers to conclude that the act of clear-cutting released the carbon into the atmosphere, disrupting the carbon cycling process.

Carbon cycling enables plants to photosynthesis and produce food. This natural cycle requires output of carbon into the atmosphere through cellular respiration. However, due to modern technological advancements and human interference with ecological processes, carbon output occurs at a much more rapid pace than ever before. Factories, cars and other human contributions produce carbon emissions, which ultimately increase the amount of carbon entering the atmosphere. This study shows that even the practice of clear-cutting trees produces similar emissions effects as other human interferences.

I think that this finding is interesting, however I have a difficult time thinking of an alternative to the practices of collecting resources for human use. Changing our lifestyle is improbable; it is far too large scale to be practical. Perhaps we should focus on smaller contributions to preserving ecosystems, such as diversifying the forests we cut down, or planting new trees in areas as we clear-cut them.

Dartmouth College. "Clear-cutting destabilizes carbon in forest soils, study finds." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 15 April 2016. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160415125925.htm>.

Pesticide Endangers Bee Pollination Patterns by Taylor Muckle

A study published in Functional Ecology on March 14, 2016, shared that the pesticides used to control pest populations are also unintentionally warding off important species. This study focused on the importance of bees in the environment and the ecosystem services they provide. Most people know the general job of bees: to pollinate and help plants and flowers flourish. Many do not know, however, that bees are keystone species in their environments because without them, the pollination process can’t happen as effectively and plants either wither away or are unable to produce a productive crop yield. The study shows how when one group of bees were exposed to pesticides, they took longer to collect pollen and were not as efficient in doing so compared to a control group of bees who were not exposed to pesticides. Nigel Raine, an environmental science professor, states, "Bees rely on learning to locate flowers, track their profitability and work out how best to efficiently extract nectar and pollen...If exposure to low levels of pesticide affects their ability to learn, bees may struggle to collect food and impair the essential pollination services they provide to both crops and wild plants."

This study performed relates to this course because bees play such an important role in our ecosystem, anthropogenic impacts are causing their normal habits to be disturbed and lastly, bees are a keystone species. Without these bees present to pollinate plants and flowers, farmers’ crops may be altered and some animals may no longer have a food source; such as herbivores that eat the plants that were once pollinated by the bees. Once the herbivores have nothing left to eat, they are either forced to migrate or die off which, in turn, alters the whole food chain and different trophic levels.

After reading about this study, I am worried about the bee population and what their changing pollinating patterns will mean for the species around them and the produce available to consumers. I knew that non-ecofriendly pesticides were never going to be helpful to the environment or the creatures living in the infected region, however I did not realize that a non-pest species like bees ingesting these pesticides would have such a detrimental domino effect. One way that we can help the bees is to use natural pesticides such as planting other plants that are known to ward of certain types of pests instead of the harsh, chemical based products that do more damage than good.

A bumble bee in search of pollen.

Credit: University of Guelph

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/03/160314140120.htm

After 5 years from the Fukushima disaster: Impacts on the environment

http://www.newsx.com/world/17265-eu-to-ease-restrictions-on-fukushima-food

It has been 5 years since a 9.0-magnitude earthquake followed by a 30-foot tsunami hit northeast Japan, which caused the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant to meltdown. Greenpeace Japan, which is a non-governmental environmental organization, reported in March that the environmental impacts caused by this accident are becoming apparent and these impacts will last for decades or even for centuries. According to the investigations by Greenpeace, these environmental impacts include:

・Mutations in trees

・DNA damaged worms

・Radiation-contaminated mountain water

・Heritable mutations in pale blue butterfly populations

・Reduced fertility in barn swallows

・Decreases in the abundance of 57 bird species with higher radiation levels

・High levels of cesium contamination of coastal estuaries

Mutant Dandelions in Fukushima. Photo by Timothy Mousseau

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027088782

http://yournewswire.com/nine-million-bags-of-nuclear-waste-piled-up-in-fukushima/

This topic relates to ecology because wildlife has been threatened by the nuclear accident. Even though tsunami and earthquake are natural phenomena and we cannot control them, we could have prevented the nuclear accident. The safety of nuclear power plants has been one of the biggest concerns for not only Japanese citizens, but also for the whole world. Japanese decision-makers failed to learn lessons from the nuclear disaster that happened at Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in 1986. Thus the safety measures were not reconsidered and Fukushima nuclear disaster happened in 2011. The environmental effects were not visible five years ago, but they are becoming apparent and serious today. This is not only an issue for Fukushima or Japan, but also an issue for the countries that possess nuclear power plants. Many species have been exposed to radiation from the nuclear power plants since the accident. Radiation causes long-term effects so decontamination work is needed for reducing the ecological impacts, but the Japanese government has been doing nothing to this issue. Over 9 million bags of nuclear wastes from decontamination works have been piled up near the nuclear power plants in Fukushima. Japanese Prime Minister Abe has been spreading a myth that “the situation is returning to normal.” Moreover, Abe government plans to restart nuclear power plants that were shut down after the nuclear disaster in Fukushima. The future of nuclear power depends on decisions we make today. If we do not learn from Fukushima disaster, we will repeat the same mistake again. I think that the Japanese government is not taking this issue seriously. Many Japanese citizens, including myself, are skeptical about the Japanese government. The Fukushima issue has not solved yet and the ecological impacts are becoming apparent, but the government is ignoring it and restarting nuclear power plants. People are starting to forget about the Fukushima disaster and the Japanese government is trying to erase people’s memories about the disaster. If the government does not take responsibility for the Fukushima accident, no one can solve this issue. We must never let the the Fukushima disaster happen again.

Source:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/five-years-after-fukushima-no-end-in-sight-to-ecological-fallout/5512546