Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The equilibrium sensitivity of the Earth's temperature to radiation changes

Nature Geoscience volume 1, pages 735–743 (2008)Cite this article

Abstract

The Earth's climate is changing rapidly as a result of anthropogenic carbon emissions, and damaging impacts are expected to increase with warming. To prevent these and limit long-term global surface warming to, for example, 2 °C, a level of stabilization or of peak atmospheric CO2 concentrations needs to be set. Climate sensitivity, the global equilibrium surface warming after a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration, can help with the translation of atmospheric CO2 levels to warming. Various observations favour a climate sensitivity value of about 3 °C, with a likely range of about 2–4.5 °C. However, the physics of the response and uncertainties in forcing lead to fundamental difficulties in ruling out higher values. The quest to determine climate sensitivity has now been going on for decades, with disturbingly little progress in narrowing the large uncertainty range. However, in the process, fascinating new insights into the climate system and into policy aspects regarding mitigation have been gained. The well-constrained lower limit of climate sensitivity and the transient rate of warming already provide useful information for policy makers. But the upper limit of climate sensitivity will be more difficult to quantify.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: The concept of radiative forcing, feedbacks and climate sensitivity.
Figure 2: Relation between amplifying feedbacks f and climate sensitivity S.
Figure 3: Distributions and ranges for climate sensitivity from different lines of evidence.
Figure 4: The observed global warming provides only a weak constraint on climate sensitivity.
Figure 5: Relation between atmospheric equivalent CO2 concentration chosen for stabilization and key impacts associated with equilibrium global temperature increase.
Figure 6: Allowed emissions for a stabilization of atmospheric CO2 at 450 p.p.m. as shown in Fig. 5.

References

  1. Cox, P. & Stephenson, D. Climate change—A changing climate for prediction. Science 317, 207–208 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Wigley, T. M. L. & Raper, S. C. B. Interpretation of high projections for global-mean warming. Science 293, 451–454 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Knutti, R., Stocker, T. F., Joos, F. & Plattner, G.-K. Constraints on radiative forcing and future climate change from observations and climate model ensembles. Nature 416, 719–723 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bony, S. et al. How well do we understand and evaluate climate change feedback processes? J. Clim. 19, 3445–3482 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Randall, D. A. et al. in Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (ed. Solomon, S. et al.) 589–662 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Domingues, C. M. et al. Improved estimates of upper-ocean warming and multi-decadal sea-level rise. Nature 453, 1090–U1096 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Forster, P. et al. in Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (ed. Solomon, S. et al.) 129–234 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Roe, G. H. & Baker, M. B. Why is climate sensitivity so unpredictable? Science 318, 629–632 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hansen, J. et al. in Climate Processes and Climate Sensitivity (ed. Hansen, J. & Takahashi, T.) Vol. 29 (American Geophysical Union, 1984).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Schlesinger, M. Equilibrium and transient climatic warming induced by increased atmospheric CO2 . Clim. Dyn. 1, 35–51 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Meehl, G. A. et al. Combinations of natural and anthropogenic forcings in twentieth-century climate. J. Clim. 17, 3721–3727 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Senior, C. A. & Mitchell, J. F. B. The time-dependence of climate sensitivity. Geophys. Res. Lett. 27, 2685–2688 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Boer, G. J. & Yu, B. Climate sensitivity and climate state. Clim. Dyn. 21, 167–176 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hargreaves, J. C., Abe-Ouchi, A. & Annan, J. D. Linking glacial and future climates through an ensemble of GCM simulations. Clim. Past 3, 77–87 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hansen, J. et al. Efficacy of climate forcings. J. Geophys. Res. 110, D18104 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Tett, S. F. B. et al. The impact of natural and anthropogenic forcings on climate and hydrology since 1550. Clim. Dyn. 28, 3–34 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Andronova, N., Schlesinger, M. E., Dessai, S., Hulme, M. & Li, B. in Human-induced Climate Change: An Interdisciplinary Assessment (ed. Schlesinger, M. E. et al.) 5–17 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Hegerl, G. C. et al. in Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (ed. Solomon, S. et al.) 663–745 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  19. National Research Council. Radiative Forcing of Climate Change: Expanding the Concept and Addressing Uncertainties (National Academies Press, 2005).

  20. IPCC (ed.) Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001).

  21. Wigley, T. M. L. & Schlesinger, M. E. Analytical solution for the effect of increasing CO2 on global mean temperature. Nature 315, 649–652 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Knutti, R., Joos, F., Müller, S. A., Plattner, G.-K. & Stocker, T. F. Probabilistic climate change projections for CO2 stabilization profiles. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L20707 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Allen, M. R. et al. in Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change (ed. Schellnhuber, H. J. et al.) 281–289 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2006).

  24. Meehl, G. A. et al. in Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (ed. Solomon, S. et al.) 747–845 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Arrhenius, S. On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground. Phil. Mag. 41, 237–276 (1896).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Callendar, G. S. The artificial production of carbon dioxide and its influence on temperature. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 64, 223–240 (1938).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Manabe, S. & Wetherald, R. T. Thermal equilibrium of the atmosphere with a given distribution of relative humidity. J. Atmos. Sci. 50, 241–259 (1967).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hansen, J. et al. Climate response-times—Dependence on climate sensitivity and ocean mixing. Science 229, 857–859 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Budyko, M. I. The effect of solar radiation variations on the climate of the Earth. Tellus 21, 611–619 (1969).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sellers, W. D. A global climatic model based on the energy balance of the Earth–atmosphere system. J. Appl. Meteorol. 8, 392–400 (1969).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. North, G. R., Cahalan, R. F. & Coakley, J. A. Energy balance climate models. Rev. Geophys. Space Phys. 19, 91–121 (1981).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Cess, R. D. et al. Interpretation of cloud–climate feedback as produced by 14 atmospheric general-circulation models. Science 245, 513–516 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Soden, B. J. & Held, I. M. An assessment of climate feedbacks in coupled ocean–atmosphere models. J. Clim. 19, 3354–3360 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Stainforth, D. A. et al. Uncertainty in predictions of the climate response to rising levels of greenhouse gases. Nature 433, 403–406 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Murphy, J. M. et al. Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations. Nature 429, 768–772 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Knutti, R., Meehl, G. A., Allen, M. R. & Stainforth, D. A. Constraining climate sensitivity from the seasonal cycle in surface temperature. J. Clim. 19, 4224–4233 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Piani, C., Frame, D. J., Stainforth, D. A. & Allen, M. R. Constraints on climate change from a multi thousand member ensemble of simulations. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L23825 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wigley, T. M. L., Jones, P. D. & Raper, S. C. B. The observed global warming record: What does it tell us? Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 8314–8320 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Siegenthaler, U. & Oeschger, H. Transient temperature changes due to increasing CO2 using simple models. Ann. Glaciol. 5, 153–159 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Knutti, R., Stocker, T. F., Joos, F. & Plattner, G.-K. Probabilistic climate change projections using neural networks. Clim. Dyn. 21, 257–272 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Andronova, N. G. & Schlesinger, M. E. Objective estimation of the probability density function for climate sensitivity. J. Geophys. Res. 106, 22605–22612 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Frame, D. J. et al. Constraining climate forecasts: The role of prior assumptions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L09702 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Forest, C. E., Stone, P. H. & Sokolov, A. P. Estimated PDFs of climate system properties including natural and anthropogenic forcings. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, L01705 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Forest, C. E., Stone, P. H., Sokolov, A. P., Allen, M. R. & Webster, M. D. Quantifying uncertainties in climate system properties with the use of recent climate observations. Science 295, 113–117 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Tomassini, L., Reichert, P., Knutti, R., Stocker, T. F. & Borsuk, M. E. Robust Bayesian uncertainty analysis of climate system properties using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. J. Clim. 20, 1239–1254 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Harvey, L. D. D. & Kaufmann, R. K. Simultaneously constraining climate sensitivity and aerosol radiative forcing. J. Clim. 15, 2837–2861 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Tol, R. S. J. & De Vos, A. F. A Bayesian statistical analysis of the enhanced greenhouse effect. Clim. Change 38, 87–112 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Gregory, J. M., Stouffer, R. J., Raper, S. C. B., Stott, P. A. & Rayner, N. A. An observationally based estimate of the climate sensitivity. J. Clim. 15, 3117–3121 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Forster, P. M. D. & Gregory, J. M. The climate sensitivity and its components diagnosed from Earth radiation budget data. J. Clim. 19, 39–52 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Wigley, T. M. L., Ammann, C. M., Santer, B. D. & Raper, S. C. B. Effect of climate sensitivity on the response to volcanic forcing. J. Geophys. Res. 110, D09107 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Boer, G. J., Stowasser, M. & Hamilton, K. Inferring climate sensitivity from volcanic events. Clim. Dyn. 28, 481–502 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Yokohata, T. et al. Climate response to volcanic forcing: Validation of climate sensitivity of a coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation model. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L21710 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Soden, B. J., Wetherald, R. T., Stenchikov, G. L. & Robock, A. Global cooling after the eruption of Mount Pinatubo: A test of climate feedback by water vapor. Science 296, 727–730 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Lorius, C., Jouzel, J., Raynaud, D., Hansen, J. & LeTreut, H. The ice-core record—climate sensitivity and future greenhouse warming. Nature 347, 139–145 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Hoffert, M. I. & Covey, C. Deriving global climate sensitivity from palaeoclimate reconstructions. Nature 360, 573–576 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Covey, C., Sloan, L. C. & Hoffert, M. I. Paleoclimate data constraints on climate sensitivity: The paleocalibration method. Clim. Change 32, 165–184 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Masson-Delmotte, V. et al. Past and future polar amplification of climate change: climate model intercomparisons and ice-core constraints. Clim. Dyn. 26, 513–529 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Annan, J. D., Hargreaves, J. C., Ohgaito, R., Abe-Ouchi, A. & Emori, S. Efficiently constraining climate sensitivity with ensembles of paleoclimate simulations. SOLA 1, 181–184 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Schneider von Deimling, T., Held, H., Ganopolski, A. & Rahmstorf, S. Climate sensitivity estimated from ensemble simulations of glacial climate. Clim. Dyn. 27, 149–163 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Crucifix, M. Does the Last Glacial Maximum constrain climate sensitivity? Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, L18701, 10.11029/12006GL027137 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Andronova, N. G., Schlesinger, M. E. & Mann, M. E. Are reconstructed pre-instrumental hemispheric temperatures consistent with instrumental hemispheric temperatures? Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L12202, 10.11029/12004GL019658 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Hegerl, G. C., Crowley, T. J., Hyde, W. T. & Frame, D. J. Climate sensitivity constrained by temperature reconstructions over the past seven centuries. Nature 440, 1029–1032 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Rind, D. et al. The relative importance of solar and anthropogenic forcing of climate change between the Maunder Minimum and the present. J. Clim. 17, 906–929 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Royer, D. L., Berner, R. A. & Park, J. Climate sensitivity constrained by CO2 concentrations over the past 420 million years. Nature 446, 530–532 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Barron, E. J., Fawcett, P. J., Peterson, W. H., Pollard, D. & Thompson, S. L. A Simulation of Midcretaceous climate. Paleoceanography 10, 953–962 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Shaviv, N. J. On climate response to changes in the cosmic ray flux and radiative budget. J. Geophys. Res. 110, A08105, 10.01029/02004JA010866 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Chylek, P. et al. Limits on climate sensitivity derived from recent satellite and surface observations. J. Geophys. Res. 112, D24S04, 10.1029/2007JD008740 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Lindzen, R. S. & Giannitsis, C. Reconciling observations of global temperature change. Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, 1583, 10.1029/2001GL014074 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Schwartz, S. E. Heat capacity, time constant, and sensitivity of Earth's climate system. J. Geophys. Res. 112, D24S05, 10.1029/2007JD008746 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Douglass, D. H. & Knox, R. S. Climate forcing by the volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L05710, 10.01029/02004GL022119 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Chylek, P. & Lohmann, U. Aerosol radiative forcing and climate sensitivity deduced from the last glacial maximum to Holocene transition. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L04804, 10.01029/02007GL032759 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Wigley, T. M. L., Ammann, C. M., Santer, B. D. & Taylor, K. E. Comment on 'Climate forcing by the volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo' by David H. Douglass and Robert S. Knox. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L20709, 10.1029/2005GL023312 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Knutti, R., Krähenmann, S., Frame, D. J. & Allen, M. R. Comment on 'Heat capacity, time constant and sensitivity of Earth's climate system' by S. E. Schwartz. J. Geophys. Res. 113, D15103, 10.11029/12007JD009473 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Foster, G., Annan, J. D., Schmidt, G. A. & Mann, M. E. Comment on 'Heat capacity, time constant, and sensitivity of Earth's climate system' by S. E. Schwartz. J. Geophys. Res. 113, D15102, 10.11029/12007JD009373 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Edwards, T. L., Crucifix, M. & Harrison, S. P. Using the past to constrain the future: How the paleorecord can improve estimates of global warming. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 31, 481–500 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Van der Sluijs, J., Van Eijndhoven, J., Shackley, S. & Wynne, B. Anchoring devices in science and policy: The case of consensus around climate sensitivity. Social Stud. Sci. 28, 291–323 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Reichler, T. & Kim, J. How well do coupled models simulate today's climate? Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 89, 303–311 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Charney, J. G. Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific Assessment (National Academy of Science, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  79. IPCC (ed.) Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group I to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1996).

  80. Wigley, T. M. L. & Raper, S. C. B. Natural variability of the climate system and detection of the greenhouse effect. Nature 344, 324–327 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Frame, D. J., Stone, D. A., Stott, P. A. & Allen, M. R. Alternatives to stabilization scenarios. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, 10.1029/2006GL025801 (2006).

  82. Joshi, M. et al. A comparison of climate response to different radiative forcings in three general circulation models: Towards an improved metric of climate change. Clim. Dyn. 20, 843–854 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Davin, E. L., de Noblet-Ducoudre, N. & Friedlingstein, P. Impact of land cover change on surface climate: Relevance of the radiative forcing concept. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L13702, 10.11029/12007GL029678 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Gregory, J. M. et al. A new method for diagnosing radiative forcing and climate sensitivity. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L03205, 10.1029/2003GL018747 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Voss, R. & Mikolajewicz, U. Long-term climate changes due to increased CO2 concentration in the coupled atmosphere–ocean general circulation model ECHAM3/LSG. Clim. Dyn. 17, 45–60 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Gregory, J. & Webb, M. Tropospheric adjustment induces a cloud component in CO2 forcing. J. Clim. 21, 58–71 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Andrews, T. & Forster, P. M. CO2 forcing induces semi-direct effects with consequences for climate feedback interpretations. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L04802, 10.01029/02007GL032273 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Hansen, J. et al. Climate change and trace gases. Phil. Trans. R. Soc A 365, 1925–1954 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Swingedouw, D. et al. Antarctic ice-sheet melting provides negative feedbacks on future climate warming. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L17705, 10.11029/12008GL034410 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Morgan, M. G. & Keith, D. W. Climate change—Subjective judgments by climate experts. Environ. Sci. Technol. 29, A468–A476 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  91. Annan, J. D. & Hargreaves, J. C. Using multiple observationally-based constraints to estimate climate sensitivity. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, L06704, 10.1029/2005GL025259 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Hall, A. & Qu, X. Using the current seasonal cycle to constrain snow albedo feedback in future climate change. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, L03502, 10.01029/02005GL025127 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Harvey, L. D. D. Allowable CO2 concentrations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as a function of the climate sensitivity probability distribution function. Environ. Res. Lett. 2, 014001, 10.1088/1748-9326/1082/1081/014001 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Weitzman, M. On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev. Econ. Stat. (in the press).

  95. Knutti, R. et al. A review of uncertainties in global temperature projections over the twenty-first century. J. Clim. 21, 2651–2663 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Stott, P. A. et al. Observational constraints on past attributable warming and predictions of future global warming. J. Clim. 19, 3055–3069 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Knutti, R. & Tomassini, L. Constraints on the transient climate response from observed global temperature and ocean heat uptake. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L09701, 10.01029/02007GL032904 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Stott, P. A. & Forest, C. E. Ensemble climate predictions using climate models and observational constraints. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 365, 2029–2052 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Plattner, G.-K. et al. Long-term climate commitments projected with climate-carbon cycle models. J. Clim. 21, 2721–2751, 10.1175/2007JCLI1905.2721 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. IPCC. in Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (ed. Parry, M. L. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

  101. IPCC. Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (ed. Nakicenovic, N. & Swart, R.) (IPCC, 2000).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The International Detection and Attribution Working Group (IDAG) acknowledges support from the US Department of Energy's Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Climate Program Office.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, ETH Zurich, Zurich, CH-8092, Switzerland

    Reto Knutti

  2. School of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3JW, UK

    Gabriele C. Hegerl

Authors
  1. Reto Knutti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gabriele C. Hegerl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reto Knutti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Knutti, R., Hegerl, G. The equilibrium sensitivity of the Earth's temperature to radiation changes. Nature Geosci 1, 735–743 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo337

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo337

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing