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.

  • Article
  • Published:

Future temperature extremes threaten land vertebrates

Nature volume 615, pages 461–467 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 06 February 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

The frequency, duration, and intensity of extreme thermal events are increasing and are projected to further increase by the end of the century1,2. Despite the considerable consequences of temperature extremes on biological systems3,4,5,6,7,8, we do not know which species and locations are most exposed worldwide. Here we provide a global assessment of land vertebrates’ exposures to future extreme thermal events. We use daily maximum temperature data from 1950 to 2099 to quantify future exposure to high frequency, duration, and intensity of extreme thermal events to land vertebrates. Under a high greenhouse gas emission scenario (Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 5–8.5 (SSP5–8.5); 4.4 °C warmer world), 41.0% of all land vertebrates (31.1% mammals, 25.8% birds, 55.5% amphibians and 51.0% reptiles) will be exposed to extreme thermal events beyond their historical levels in at least half their distribution by 2099. Under intermediate-high (SSP3–7.0; 3.6 °C warmer world) and intermediate (SSP2–4.5; 2.7 °C warmer world) emission scenarios, estimates for all vertebrates are 28.8% and 15.1%, respectively. Importantly, a low-emission future (SSP1–2.6, 1.8 °C warmer world) will greatly reduce the overall exposure of vertebrates (6.1% of species) and can fully prevent exposure in many species assemblages. Mid-latitude assemblages (desert, shrubland, and grassland biomes), rather than tropics9,10, will face the most severe exposure to future extreme thermal events. By 2099, under SSP5–8.5, on average 3,773 species of land vertebrates (11.2%) will face extreme thermal events for more than half a year period. Overall, future extreme thermal events will force many species and assemblages into constant severe thermal stress. Deep greenhouse gas emissions cuts are urgently needed to limit species’ exposure to thermal extremes.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

Fig. 1: Species geographical range exposure to extreme thermal events in the future.
Fig. 2: Spatial patterns of land vertebrate assemblages at risk due to extreme thermal events by 2099.
Fig. 3: Simultaneous risk due to multiple aspects of extreme thermal events.
Fig. 4: Projected total duration of exposure to extreme thermal events by 2099.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The NEX-GDDP CMIP6 climate data layer for the five GCMs were obtained from the NEX-GDDP CMIP6 webpage (https://nccs.nasa.gov/services/data-collections/land-based-products/NEX-GDDP-CMIP6; accessed January 2022). The NEX-GDDP CMIP5 climate data layer for the five GCMs were obtained from Amazon web services (https://data.nasa.gov/Earth-Science/Amazon-Web-Services-NASA-Earth-Exchange-NEX-Global/7yme-6yjr; accessed November 2020). Climate data for the low-emission scenario were downloaded from the original CMIP6 runs (coarse resolution) from the Copernicus Climate Data Store (https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu; accessed January 2022). ECMFW ERA5 data were obtained from Copernicus Climate Data Store (https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu; accessed November 2020). Species distribution data are available for mammals and amphibians from the IUCN (https://iucn.org; accessed November 2020), birds from BirdLife International (https://birdlife.org; accessed November 2020); reptiles from GARD initiative (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.9cnp5hqmb; accessed November 2020). Physiological thermal tolerance data were obtained from the GlobTherm database (https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2018.22; accessed November 2020). Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

The R codes associated with the study are available at FigShare (https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.16641079).

Change history

References

  1. Fischer, E. M. & Knutti, R. Anthropogenic contribution to global occurrence of heavy-precipitation and high-temperature extremes. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 560–564 (2015).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Meehl, G. A. & Tebaldi, C. More intense, more frequent, and longer lasting heat waves in the 21st century. Science 305, 994–997 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. Harris, R. M. et al. Biological responses to the press and pulse of climate trends and extreme events. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 579–587 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Till, A., Rypel, A. L., Bray, A. & Fey, S. B. Fish die-offs are concurrent with thermal extremes in north temperate lakes. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 637–641 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  5. Smale, D. A. et al. Marine heatwaves threaten global biodiversity and the provision of ecosystem services. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 306–312 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Vasseur, D. A. et al. Increased temperature variation poses a greater risk to species than climate warming. Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20132612 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ma, G., Rudolf, V. H. & Ma, C. Extreme temperature events alter demographic rates, relative fitness, and community structure. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 1794–1808 (2015).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Vázquez, D. P., Gianoli, E., Morris, W. F. & Bozinovic, F. Ecological and evolutionary impacts of changing climatic variability. Biol. Rev. 92, 22–42 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tewksbury, J. J., Huey, R. B. & Deutsch, C. A. Putting the heat on tropical animals. Science 320, 1296–1297 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dillon, M. E., Wang, G. & Huey, R. B. Global metabolic impacts of recent climate warming. Nature 467, 704–706 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Power, S. B. & Delage, F. P. Setting and smashing extreme temperature records over the coming century. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 529–534 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Fischer, E. M., Sippel, S. & Knutti, R. Increasing probability of record-shattering climate extremes. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 689–695 (2021).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Román-Palacios, C. & Wiens, J. J. Recent responses to climate change reveal the drivers of species extinction and survival. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 4211–4217 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. Soroye, P., Newbold, T. & Kerr, J. Climate change contributes to widespread declines among bumble bees across continents. Science 367, 685–688 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. McKechnie, A. E. & Wolf, B. O. Climate change increases the likelihood of catastrophic avian mortality events during extreme heat waves. Biol. Lett. 6, 253–256 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Maxwell, S. L. et al. Conservation implications of ecological responses to extreme weather and climate events. Divers. Distrib. 25, 613–625 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Seneviratne, S. I. et al. in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) Ch. 11, 1571–1759 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2021).

  18. Mora, C. et al. Global risk of deadly heat. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 501–506 (2017).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. Battisti, D. S. & Naylor, R. L. Historical warnings of future food insecurity with unprecedented seasonal heat. Science 323, 240–244 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Warren, R., Price, J., Graham, E., Forstenhaeusler, N. & VanDerWal, J. The projected effect on insects, vertebrates, and plants of limiting global warming to 1.5°C rather than 2°C. Science 360, 791–795 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Trisos, C. H., Merow, C. & Pigot, A. L. The projected timing of abrupt ecological disruption from climate change. Nature 580, 496–501 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. Deutsch, C. A. et al. Impacts of climate warming on terrestrial ectotherms across latitude. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 6668–6672 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  23. Ma, G., Hoffmann, A. A. & Ma, C.-S. Daily temperature extremes play an important role in predicting thermal effects. J. Exp. Biol. 218, 2289–2296 (2015).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Paaijmans, K. P. et al. Temperature variation makes ectotherms more sensitive to climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 2373–2380 (2013).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. Bütikofer, L. et al. The problem of scale in predicting biological responses to climate. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 6657–6666 (2020).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. Seneviratne, S. I., Donat, M. G., Pitman, A. J., Knutti, R. & Wilby, R. L. Allowable CO2 emissions based on regional and impact-related climate targets. Nature 529, 477–483 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Buckley, L. B. & Huey, R. B. Temperature extremes: geographic patterns, recent changes, and implications for organismal vulnerabilities. Glob. Change Biol. 22, 3829–3842 (2016).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Garcia, R. A., Cabeza, M., Rahbek, C. & Araújo, M. B. Multiple dimensions of climate change and their implications for biodiversity. Science 344, 1247579 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Vogel, M. M. et al. Regional amplification of projected changes in extreme temperatures strongly controlled by soil moisture-temperature feedbacks. Geophys. Res. Lett. 44, 1511–1519 (2017).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  30. Tamarin-Brodsky, T., Hodges, K., Hoskins, B. J. & Shepherd, T. G. Changes in Northern Hemisphere temperature variability shaped by regional warming patterns. Nat. Geosci. 13, 414–421 (2020).

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  31. Schär, C. et al. The role of increasing temperature variability in European summer heatwaves. Nature 427, 332–336 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  32. Pinsky, M. L., Eikeset, A. M., McCauley, D. J., Payne, J. L. & Sunday, J. M. Greater vulnerability to warming of marine versus terrestrial ectotherms. Nature 569, 108–111 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  33. Sinervo, B. et al. Erosion of lizard diversity by climate change and altered thermal niches. Science 328, 894–899 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  34. Perkins, S. E. & Alexander, L. V. On the measurement of heat waves. J. Clim. 26, 4500–4517 (2013).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  35. Sunday, J. et al. Thermal tolerance patterns across latitude and elevation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 374, 20190036 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Hoffmann, A. A. Physiological climatic limits in Drosophila: patterns and implications. J. Exp. Biol. 213, 870–880 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Buckley, L. B. & Huey, R. B. How extreme temperatures impact organisms and the evolution of their thermal tolerance. Integr. Comp. Biol. 56, 98–109 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Cohen, J. M., Fink, D. & Zuckerberg, B. Avian responses to extreme weather across functional traits and temporal scales. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 4240–4250 (2020).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  39. Schwalm, C. R., Glendon, S. & Duffy, P. B. RCP8.5 tracks cumulative CO2 emissions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 19656–19657 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  40. Urban, M. C. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science 348, 571–573 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  41. Jentsch, A., Kreyling, J. & Beierkuhnlein, C. A new generation of climate-change experiments: events, not trends. Front. Ecol. Environ. 5, 365–374 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Riddell, E. A. et al. Exposure to climate change drives stability or collapse of desert mammal and bird communities. Science 371, 633–636 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  43. Welbergen, J. A., Klose, S. M., Markus, N. & Eby, P. Climate change and the effects of temperature extremes on Australian flying-foxes. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 419–425 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. McKechnie, A. E., Rushworth, I. A., Myburgh, F. & Cunningham, S. J. Mortality among birds and bats during an extreme heat event in eastern South Africa. Austral Ecol. 46, 687–691 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Thompson, R. M., Beardall, J., Beringer, J., Grace, M. & Sardina, P. Means and extremes: building variability into community-level climate change experiments. Ecol. Lett. 16, 799–806 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Perez, T. M., Stroud, J. T. & Feeley, K. J. Thermal trouble in the tropics. Science 351, 1392–1393 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  47. Huey, R. B. et al. Why tropical forest lizards are vulnerable to climate warming. Proc. R. Soc. B 276, 1939–1948 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Kingsolver, J. G., Diamond, S. E. & Buckley, L. B. Heat stress and the fitness consequences of climate change for terrestrial ectotherms. Funct. Ecol. 27, 1415–1423 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. R. Kearney, M. Activity restriction and the mechanistic basis for extinctions under climate warming. Ecol. Lett. 16, 1470–1479 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Rezende, E. L., Bozinovic, F., Szilágyi, A. & Santos, M. Predicting temperature mortality and selection in natural Drosophila populations. Science 369, 1242–1245 (2020).

    Article  MathSciNet  CAS  PubMed  MATH  ADS  Google Scholar 

  51. Chen, I.-C., Hill, J. K., Ohlemüller, R., Roy, D. B. & Thomas, C. D. Rapid range shifts of species associated with high levels of climate warming. Science 333, 1024–1026 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  52. Cohen, J. M., Lajeunesse, M. J. & Rohr, J. R. A global synthesis of animal phenological responses to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 224–228 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  53. Levy, O., Dayan, T., Porter, W. P. & Kronfeld-Schor, N. Time and ecological resilience: can diurnal animals compensate for climate change by shifting to nocturnal activity? Ecol. Monogr. 89, e01334 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Faurby, S. & Araújo, M. B. Anthropogenic range contractions bias species climate change forecasts. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 252–256 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  55. Sunday, J. M. et al. Thermal-safety margins and the necessity of thermoregulatory behavior across latitude and elevation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 5610–5615 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  56. Scheffers, B. R., Edwards, D. P., Diesmos, A., Williams, S. E. & Evans, T. A. Microhabitats reduce animal’s exposure to climate extremes. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 495–503 (2014).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  57. Huey, R. B. et al. Predicting organismal vulnerability to climate warming: roles of behaviour, physiology and adaptation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 367, 1665–1679 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Kearney, M., Shine, R. & Porter, W. P. The potential for behavioral thermoregulation to buffer “cold-blooded” animals against climate warming. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 3835–3840 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  59. Morley, S. A., Peck, L. S., Sunday, J. M., Heiser, S. & Bates, A. E. Physiological acclimation and persistence of ectothermic species under extreme heat events. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 28, 1018–1037 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Cahill, A. E. et al. How does climate change cause extinction? Proc. R. Soc. B 280, 20121890 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Lewis, F. et al. in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) 147–1926 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2021).

  62. Thakur, M. P., Bakker, E. S., Veen, G. C. & Harvey, J. A. Climate extremes, rewilding, and the role of microhabitats. One Earth 2, 506–509 (2020).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  63. Albright, T. P. et al. Mapping evaporative water loss in desert passerines reveals an expanding threat of lethal dehydration. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 2283–2288 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  64. Thrasher, B. et al. NASA Global daily downscaled projections, CMIP6. Sci. Data 9, 262 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Thrasher, B., Maurer, E. P., McKellar, C. & Duffy, P. B. Bias correcting climate model simulated daily temperature extremes with quantile mapping. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 16, 3309–3314 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  66. Jin, Z. et al. Do maize models capture the impacts of heat and drought stresses on yield? Using algorithm ensembles to identify successful approaches. Glob. Change Biol. 22, 3112–3126 (2016).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  67. Zhang, L., Yang, B., Li, S., Hou, Y. & Huang, D. Potential rice exposure to heat stress along the Yangtze River in China under RCP8.5 scenario. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 248, 185–196 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  68. Al-Bakri, J. et al. Assessment of climate changes and their impact on barley yield in Mediterranean environment using NEX-GDDP downscaled GCMs and DSSAT. Earth Syst. Environ. 5, 751–766 (2021).

  69. Semakula, H. M. et al. Prediction of future malaria hotspots under climate change in sub-Saharan Africa. Clim. Change 143, 415–428 (2017).

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  70. Iwamura, T., Guzman-Holst, A. & Murray, K. A. Accelerating invasion potential of disease vector Aedes aegypti under climate change. Nat. Commun. 11, 2130 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  71. Jones, A. E. et al. Bluetongue risk under future climates. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 153–157 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  72. Obradovich, N. & Fowler, J. H. Climate change may alter human physical activity patterns. Nat. Hum. Behav. 1, 0097 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Obradovich, N., Migliorini, R., Mednick, S. C. & Fowler, J. H. Nighttime temperature and human sleep loss in a changing climate. Sci. Adv. 3, e1601555 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  74. Meehl, G. A. et al. Context for interpreting equilibrium climate sensitivity and transient climate response from the CMIP6 Earth system models. Sci. Adv. 6, eaba1981 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  75. Hausfather, Z., Marvel, K., Schmidt, G. A., Nielsen-Gammon, J. W. & Zelinka, M. Climate simulations: recognize the ‘hot model’ problem. Nature 605, 26–29 (2022).

  76. O’Neill, B. C. et al. The scenario model intercomparison project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 3461–3482 (2016).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  77. IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) (WMO, 2018).

  78. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species Version 2017, 3 (IUCN, 2017).

  79. Roll, U. et al. The global distribution of tetrapods reveals a need for targeted reptile conservation. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1677 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Hurlbert, A. H. & Jetz, W. Species richness, hotspots, and the scale dependence of range maps in ecology and conservation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 13384–13389 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  81. Maclean, I. M. Predicting future climate at high spatial and temporal resolution. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 1003–1011 (2020).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  82. Warren, R. et al. Quantifying the benefit of early climate change mitigation in avoiding biodiversity loss. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 678–682 (2013).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  83. Jiguet, F. et al. Thermal range predicts bird population resilience to extreme high temperatures. Ecol. Lett. 9, 1321–1330 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Hobday, A. J. et al. A hierarchical approach to defining marine heatwaves. Prog. Oceanogr. 141, 227–238 (2016).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  85. Laufkötter, C., Zscheischler, J. & Frölicher, T. L. High-impact marine heatwaves attributable to human-induced global warming. Science 369, 1621–1625 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  86. Coumou, D. & Rahmstorf, S. A decade of weather extremes. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 491–496 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  87. Oliver, E. C. et al. Longer and more frequent marine heatwaves over the past century. Nat. Commun. 9, 1324 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  88. Field, C. B., Barros, V., Stocker, T. F. & Dahe, Q. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012).

  89. Woolway, R. I. et al. Lake heatwaves under climate change. Nature 589, 402–407 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  90. Gruber, N., Boyd, P. W., Frölicher, T. L. & Vogt, M. Biogeochemical extremes and compound events in the ocean. Nature 600, 395–407 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  91. Cahill, A. E. et al. Causes of warm-edge range limits: systematic review, proximate factors and implications for climate change. J. Biogeogr. 41, 429–442 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Wiens, J. J. Climate-related local extinctions are already widespread among plant and animal species. PLoS Biol. 14, e2001104 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Valladares, F. et al. The effects of phenotypic plasticity and local adaptation on forecasts of species range shifts under climate change. Ecol. Lett. 17, 1351–1364 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Bennett, J. M. et al. The evolution of critical thermal limits of life on Earth. Nat. Commun. 12, 1198 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  95. Sunday, J. M., Bates, A. E. & Dulvy, N. K. Thermal tolerance and the global redistribution of animals. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 686–690 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  96. Pearson, R. G. & Dawson, T. P. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 12, 361–371 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Louthan, A. M., Doak, D. F. & Angert, A. L. Where and when do species interactions set range limits? Trends Ecol. Evol. 30, 780–792 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Barbarossa, V. et al. Threats of global warming to the world’s freshwater fishes. Nat. Commun. 12, 1701 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  99. Clusella-Trullas, S., Blackburn, T. M. & Chown, S. L. Climatic predictors of temperature performance curve parameters in ectotherms imply complex responses to climate change. Am. Nat. 177, 738–751 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Qu, Y.-F. & Wiens, J. J. Higher temperatures lower rates of physiological and niche evolution. Proc. R. Soc. B 287, 20200823 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Pither, J. Climate tolerance and interspecific variation in geographic range size. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, 475–481 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Bennett, J. M. et al. GlobTherm, a global database on thermal tolerances for aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Sci. Data 5, 180022 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  103. R Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2019); http://www.R-project.org/

  104. Chen, H., Sun, J., Lin, W. & Xu, H. Comparison of CMIP6 and CMIP5 models in simulating climate extremes. Sci. Bull. 65, 1415–1418 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the staff at the IUCN for making the species distribution data publicly available; J. Rosenblatt for allowing us to use his server. U.R. and S.M. acknowledge funding from the Israeli Science Foundation (grant no. ISF-406/19); G.M. is supported by the Swiss Institute for Dryland Environmental and Energy Research, and the Planning and Budgeting Committee postdoctoral fellowships. Climate scenarios used were from the NEX-GDDP CMIP6 dataset, prepared by the Climate Analytics Group and NASA Ames Research Center using the NASA Earth Exchange, and distributed by the NASA Center for Climate Simulation (NCCS). We acknowledge the computational resources provided by the High-Performance Computation facility at the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (BGU HPC) and the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Department of Computer Science clusters (BGU ISE-CS-DT).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Jacob Blaustein Center for Scientific Cooperation, The Jacob Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Midreshet Ben-Gurion, Israel

    Gopal Murali

  2. Mitrani Department of Desert Ecology, The Swiss Institute for Dryland Environments and Energy Research, The Jacob Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Midreshet Ben-Gurion, Israel

    Gopal Murali & Uri Roll

  3. Department F.-A. Forel for Aquatic and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

    Takuya Iwamura

  4. Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, College of Forestry, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA

    Takuya Iwamura

  5. School of Zoology, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Shai Meiri

  6. The Steinhardt Museum of Natural History, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Shai Meiri

Authors
  1. Gopal Murali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Takuya Iwamura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shai Meiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Uri Roll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

G.M. conceived the study, developed the methods, handled all data processing, performed the analyses and generated the figures with input from T.I., S.M. and U.R. All of the authors contributed to writing of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gopal Murali.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature thanks Raymond Huey, Alex Pigot and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Fig. 1 Overview of methods employed for estimating species range exposure to extreme thermal events.

Illustrated using the geographical range of the Colorado river toad Incilius alvarius. Stage 1: species-specific threshold is calculated as the spatial maximum of 99% daily maximum temperature between the years 1950 to 2005 (PTmax99 – indicated by a red arrow). Stage 2 and 3: extreme thermal event metrics – frequency (F), duration (D), and intensity (I) for future (indicated by letter F before each metric) and historical (indicated by letter H before each metric) period was calculated by comparing PTmax99 with daily maximum temperature time series per grid-cell for each year. Extreme event was designated if the daily maximum temperature is above the species-specific threshold for more than 5 or 10 consecutive days. Stage 4: to designate grid-cell exposure, future extreme event metric per year was compared against the maximum of historical metric (Hfmax, Hdmax, and HImax). Stage 2 to 4 are repeated for each year (indicated by the circular arrow).

Extended Data Fig. 2 Comparisons of species-specific thresholds (PTmax99) and physiological upper thermal tolerances.

Species physiological upper thermal tolerance data [the upper boundary of the thermal neutral zone (UTNZ) for mammals and birds; critical thermal maximum (CTmax) for reptiles and amphibians] are compared against the model specific species-specific threshold (PTmax99) estimated from the NEX-GDDP CMIP6 dataset for each taxonomic group. Two-sided unadjusted P-values and ρ – Spearman’s correlation coefficient are shown. 1:1 line represented with red dashed line.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Species geographical range exposure under different thresholds and datasets.

Results presented for a–b when the minimal number of days required to define extreme thermal events was more than 10 days instead of 5 days (uses NEX-GDDP CMIP6 dataset), c–d for three different SSPs using a coarse resolution dataset (~96.5 km2 grid-cells; CMIP6 original runs), e–f estimates based on mean annual temperature (NEP-GDDP CMIP6), and g–h for data from NEX-GDDP CMIP5 dataset. (a,c, and g) percentage of species exposed in more than half of their geographical range to extreme thermal events by 2099 for combined exposure quantified by spatially aggregating exposure to all three metrics within the species range. Actual estimates from five GCMs (different point shapes) are presented (median model as solid triangle). (b,d, and h) mean percentage of range exposed to extreme thermal events over time as the combined exposure to all three metrics across species range. Side panel represents mean percentage range exposure of the median model (circles) and range (error bar with maximum and minimum model estimates). Estimate from five GCMs are presented per SSP scenario (the median model is highlighted as solid line). e–f same as in the other panel but uses mean annual temperature data (see methods). Scenarios and corresponding mean global warming by 2100 compared to pre-industrial conditions (1850–1900): SSP1–2.6 (1.8 °C), SSP2–4.5 (2.7 °C), SSP3–7.0 (3.6 °C), and SSP5–8.5 (4.4 °C).

Extended Data Fig. 4 Percentage of species exposed to extreme thermal events per assemblage averaged across 14 biome types by 2099.

Results are shown for a. frequency, b. duration, and c. intensity of extreme events for all land vertebrates and major taxonomic groups. The numbers on top of the bar plot represent the corresponding biome type (legend provided on top of the figure). Results are shown for the SSP5–8.5. Results for other scenarios are presented in Supplementary Fig. S27–S29. SSP5–8.5 corresponds to a mean global warming of 4.4 °C by 2100 compared to pre-industrial conditions (1850–1900).

Extended Data Fig. 5 Spatial patterns of vertebrate assemblages at risk due to extreme thermal events by 2099 for data using coarse resolution (~96.5 km2 grid-cell) climate data.

Assemblage level (i.e., per grid-cell) exposure was quantified as the percentage of species present in each grid-cell exposed to a–c frequency, d–f duration, and g–i intensity of extreme events beyond their historical levels (corresponding latitudinal patterns as mean value per 96.5 km2 grid latitudinal band is presented in j–l). Median estimates from five GCMs are shown. Scenarios and corresponding mean global warming by 2100 compared to pre-industrial conditions (1850–1900): SSP1–2.6 (1.8 °C), SSP2–4.5 (2.7 °C), SSP3–7.0 (3.6 °C), and SSP5–8.5 (4.4 °C).

Extended Data Fig. 6 Regionally contrasting tropical species vulnerability to mean and extreme temperatures by 2099.

Bivariate map showing assemblage level percentage of vertebrate species exposure to extreme thermal events and mean annual temperature (a). For extreme thermal events, combined exposure was quantified by spatially aggregating exposure to all three metrics across the species range (same as in Fig. 1b), percentage of species exposure was then aggregated within each ~24.1 km2 grid-cells. b latitudinal patterns for assemblage level exposure to extreme thermal events (yellow) and mean annual temperatures (blue) are shown. Smoothened line represents generalized additive model fits of the percentage of species exposure against the latitude value of each grid-cell (GAM; both two-sided unadjusted P < 0.001). Median estimates from five GCMs are shown. Results are presented for the SSP5–8.5 scenario – 4.4 °C of warming by 2099 compared to pre-industrial conditions (1850–1900).

Extended Data Fig. 7 Spatial patterns of mammal assemblages at risk due to extreme thermal events by 2099.

Assemblage level (i.e., per grid-cell) exposure was quantified as the percentage of species present in each grid-cell exposed to a–c frequency, d–f duration, and g–i intensity of extreme events greater than the historical levels. Latitudinal patterns as the mean value per ~24.1 km2 latitudinal band are shown in j–l. See Supplementary Fig. S12 to S15 for results using SSP3–7.0. Maps show median estimates from five GCMs. Scenarios and corresponding mean global warming by 2100 compared to pre-industrial conditions (1850–1900): SSP1–2.6 (1.8 °C), SSP2–4.5 (2.7 °C), SSP3–7.0 (3.6 °C), and SSP5–8.5 (4.4 °C).

Extended Data Fig. 8 Spatial patterns of bird assemblages at risk due to extreme thermal events by 2099.

Assemblage level (i.e., per grid-cell) exposure was quantified as the percentage of species present in each grid-cell exposed to a–c frequency, d–f duration, and g–i intensity of extreme events greater than the historical levels. Latitudinal patterns as the mean value per ~24.1 km2 latitudinal band are shown in j–l. See Supplementary Fig. S12 to S15 for results using SSP3–7.0. Maps show median estimates from five GCMs. Scenarios and corresponding mean global warming by 2100 compared to pre-industrial conditions (1850–1900): SSP1–2.6 (1.8 °C), SSP2–4.5 (2.7 °C), SSP3–7.0 (3.6 °C), and SSP5–8.5 (4.4 °C).

Extended Data Fig. 9 Spatial patterns of amphibian assemblages at risk due to extreme thermal events by 2099.

Assemblage level (i.e., per grid-cell) exposure was quantified as the percentage of species present in each grid-cell exposed to a–c frequency, d–f duration, and g–i intensity of extreme events greater than the historical levels. Latitudinal patterns as the mean value per ~24.1 km2 latitudinal band are shown in j–l. See Supplementary Fig. S12 to S15 for results using SSP3–7.0. Maps show median estimates from five GCMs. Scenarios and corresponding mean global warming by 2100 compared to pre-industrial conditions (1850–1900): SSP1–2.6 (1.8 °C), SSP2–4.5 (2.7 °C), SSP3–7.0 (3.6 °C), and SSP5–8.5 (4.4 °C).

Extended Data Fig. 10 Spatial patterns of reptilian assemblages at risk due to extreme thermal events by 2099.

Assemblage level (i.e., per grid-cell) exposure was quantified as the percentage of species present in each grid-cell exposed to a–c frequency, d–f duration, and g–i intensity of extreme events greater than the historical levels. Latitudinal patterns as the mean value per ~24.1 km2 latitudinal band are shown in j–l. See Supplementary Fig. S12 to S15 for results using SSP3–7.0. Maps show median estimates from five GCMs. Scenarios and corresponding mean global warming by 2100 compared to pre-industrial conditions (1850–1900): SSP1–2.6 (1.8 °C), SSP2–4.5 (2.7 °C), SSP3–7.0 (3.6 °C), and SSP5–8.5 (4.4 °C).

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Discussion; Supplementary Figs. 1-41; Supplementary Tables 1 and 2 and Supplementary References.

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Methods

Peer Review File

Source data

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Murali, G., Iwamura, T., Meiri, S. et al. Future temperature extremes threaten land vertebrates. Nature 615, 461–467 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05606-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05606-z

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

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