Mountain plants face extinction ‘in decades’
ALPINE plants that thrive in cool conditions are at risk of disappearing from Scottish mountains because of climate change, scientists have warned.
A study, involving biologists from 13 countries, revealed that climate change was having a more serious impact on alpine vegetation than they had expected.
The first cross-Europe survey of changing mountain vegetation has showed that some could vanish within decades.
Michael Gottfried, of the Global Observation Research Initiative in Alpine Environments (Gloria) programme, said: “Many cold-loving species are literally running out of mountain. In some of the lower mountains in Europe, we could see alpine meadows disappearing and dwarf shrubs taking over within the next few decades.”
The Gloria team, led from Austria, analysed 867 vegetation samples from 60 different summits across Europe, including in the Cairngorms in Scotland.
They compared results from 2001 and 2008 and found strong evidence to suggest cold-loving plants were being pushed out by species that preferred warmer conditions.
Among species at threat in Europe could be the edelweiss, praised in the song of the same name in The Sound of Music. It is specially adapted to the high-life at altitudes of between 6,500ft to 9,500ft. Its snow white, star-shaped leaves are covered in woolly hairs to protect them from the cold.
“We expected to find a greater number of warm-loving plants at higher altitudes, but we did not expect to find such a significant change in such a short space of time,” said Mr Gottfried.
The same effect was seen from southern countries such as Crete, to northern countries such as Scotland.
The study, published in Nature Climate Change, confirmed that there is a direct link between higher summer temperature and the shift in alpine plant composition. “While regional studies have previously made this link, this is the first time it has been shown on a continental scale,” said Mr Gottfried.
.The phenomenon whereby cold-adapted mountain plant species are gradually replaced by warm-adapted species is dubbed “thermophilisation” by the Gloria researchers.
“Our work shows that climate change affects even the outer edges of the biosphere,” said Georg Grabherr, chairman of the programme. “The thermophilisation of alpine life zones can never be controlled directly. Adaptation strategies are not an option, and we must concentrate on mitigating climate change in order to preserve our biogenetic treasure.”
As long ago as 2003, the charity WWF warned even a temperature rise of 2C could place sensitive mountain plants in the Alps and other ranges at risk.
Stefan Moidle, climate expert at WWF-Austria, said at the time: “Global warming is changing natural habitats, but alpine plants cannot move to higher, cooler locations.”
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 11 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 14 comments to this article
Page 1 of 1
Ron Greer
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 07:10 PM12 What you say about windfarms is true, they don't save CO2, they don't provide dependable power at worthwhile levels and they won't affect Scotland's contribution to climate change. You will now get a standard quote from Sam Coldstream on the evils of nuclear, despite the interesting views you set out. Since Scotland's output of CO2 is so insignificantly tiny we could also plan to harness the centuries long indigenous reserves of low-sulphur coal that lie near to existing demand centres and existing thermal stations without threatening our indigenous or introduced Arctic-Alpine flora.
AuldLochinvar
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 06:56 PM"The high Arctic tundra is evolving" -- Yeah, right. As a matter of fact, nothing that humanity is doing can adversely affect the dominant life forms of the planet. Unfortunately, the dominant life forms are single celled organisms, like bacteria. Of course when humans die off, their bacterial parasites will go extinct too, but in spite of the fuss we make about them, they're not important either, except to us.
AuldLochinvar
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 06:53 PMMeanwhile, the government is subsidising wind turbines offshore to kill the sea eagles, and is under the impression that it'll stop global warming. How many coal fired generators can the proposed array west of Tiree replace? Far less than one. Strangely enough, nuclear energy, and ideally the reactivation of the Central Electricity Generating Board, could put all the fossil carbon plants out of business. The USA has two breeder designs, the IFR and the LTFR, which they abandoned, that give more than 100 times what even the current generation of reactors does, from the same amount of uranium, and shortens the lifetime of the waste by a factor of thousands.
Ron Greer
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 01:17 PMa33 Stirring stuff and information that the Warmo-Panickers would not have volunteered to us. Thanks.
Ron Greer
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 12:51 PM9 I remember being told as a teenager, in the 1960s, of alpine plant enthusiasts bringing seedsplants back from trips to the Scandes and Alps to plant out in our hills. It's a bit late to worry now about pristine wilderness, the plants will tell us what's going to grow where and who knows what will happen when the non native sheep and the relatively recent sporting estate management wit its eco-cidal grazing-burning regime goes.
Red Etin
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 11:19 AMI was always amused by the story of John Heslop Harrison, who was distrusted by other botanists for allegedly planting "rare" species on the Isle of Rhum. Generally speaking the botany of Scotland has been more altered by gardeners introducing the likes of rhodedendron and fuchsia and the many non-native tree species. We are still rebounding from the last ice age (eg Scotland is still rising out of the sea) and some continual and completely natural longer term warming is expected.
a33
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 10:47 AMOh, before Slioch chokes on his porridge all figures based on:- . . . . . . . . http:www.cru.uea.ac.ukcrudatatemperaturehadcrut3gl.txt
a33
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 10:41 AM"extinction ‘in decades’" . "compared results from 2001 and 2008 " . . . . . . . . . . . . .So global warming has been running riot in the 21st century? Where do we get these so called "scientists"? Temperatures are measured by thermometers not by the notional variations in the proportion of Alpine plants in Scotland's highlands. So how has the global temperature been changing in the 21st century? Last year the global mean temperature was 14.37°C, the average for the previous 5 years was 14.41°C and the average for the 5 years prior to that (2001 to 2005) was 14.45°C. So global warming for the 21st century has been negative with the global mean temperature based on the lustral averages declining at a decadel rate of 0.08°C with the most recent year showing an even more dramatic rate of cooling.
Ron Greer
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 10:19 AMYup Greater growth of carbon fixing species at higher altitudes, extending the potential for the current government policy of having North American conifers as the main single land use in the Loch Lomond quasi-ersatz 'national park..
Scars
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 10:10 AMComment removed by moderator
Jacqueline Hyde
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 09:55 AM#2 Scars . . . . "Snap[!!"
Jacqueline Hyde
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 09:54 AM10,000 years ago, most of these plants almost certainly flourished in the Borders, England's Lake DistrictPeak Districtetc and the Welsh hills but have disappeared as a result of climate change. However they have been replaced by other plants which have welcomed the warmer climate. Climate change is one of the major factors in the diversity of species on this planet and the fact that, from time to time, species die out and others appear is surely something to be celebrated rather than mourned. The term "extinction" in the headline is factually inaccurate and unnecessarily emotive in the context of the article. No-one is predicting that these plants will become extinct, just that, in the future, they may cease to be present in certain locations where the currently grow. Now we can look forward to a raft of dodgy web links from Slioch to prove that scientists should never consider both sides of an argument and that anyone who tries to take a balanced view is a Denier, Heretic and Sceptic. I'm old enough to remember when scientific theory only became scientific law as a result of proving itself against scepticism but that was when science was knowledge and before it became a commercial and political plaything.
Scars
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 09:48 AMIndeed ! Evolution, for whatever reason; climate change, disasters, over population, is merely a short term blip in the "nature of things". These plants were not there 10,000 years ago as they were under a mile of ice, and one day in the future, they will be again. It happens as a consequence of the "nature" of mankind that somehow there is something that can be done to effect this ! Way too late for that, and whether man-made, or a natural cycle, climate change has been around for as long as the planet and things will come and go; and I truly believe in instances like this, where it's perceived that somehow we can have an impact on changing this, is futile. In the end, nature will take it back, all of it. We may or may not be around to see it, the species that is, but in the eternity of time that effects evolution, this is simply crying over spilled milk ... The planet, and in this case, the high arctic tundra of Scotland, is evolving to suit its environment.
unimpressedone
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 08:55 AMSo what?
Page 1 of 1
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.