The Anthropocene Didn't Just Start, Dates from at least 4,000 Years ago

Humans had caused significant landcover change on Earth up to 4000 years earlier than previously thought, University of Queensland researchers have found.

The School of Social Sciences' Dr Andrea Kay said some scientists defined the Anthropocene as starting in the 20th century, but the new research showed human-induced landcover change was globally extensive by 2000BC.

The Anthropocene - the current geological age - is viewed as the period in which human activity has been the dominant influence on Earth's climate and the environment.

"The activities of farmers, pastoralists and hunter-gatherers had significantly changed the planet four milennia ago,'' Dr Kay said.

The ArchaeoGLOBE project used an online survey to gather land-use estimates over the past 10,000 years from archaeologists with regional expertise.

"The modern rate and scale of anthropogenic global change is far greater than those of the deep past, but the long-term cumulative changes that early food producers wrought on Earth are greater than many people realise," Dr Kay said.

"Even small-scale, shifting agriculture can cause significant change when considered at large scales and over long time-periods."

link.

2nd link.  3rd link. 4th link. 5th link. 6th link.  7th link.  8th link.

paper link.

Note: *NO* part of the globe was exempt.  Not even the Americas.

People Deforested the Central African Tropical Rain Forest 2,600 Years ago

The forested expanses of Central Africa host the second largest block of tropical rainforest on Earth (after Amazonia), stretching over around 2 × 106 km2. They are the great green heart of Africa, and changes in vegetation cover are likely to have important but poorly understood influences on the climate of much of the continent (1). A remarkable feature is that this blanket of forest appears quite tenuous—under the arid climates of the ice ages, the forest appears to have retreated into isolated pockets surrounded by savanna grasslands. Even in the climatically stable Holocene, there appears to have been periods of substantial forest retreat. In particular, there is evidence for a period of major forest loss between 3,000 and 2,000 y ago [termed the Late Holocene rainforest crisis (LHRC) (2)]. Attributing the cause of this decline is complicated by the fact that this period coincided with major expansion of Neolithic and early Iron Age farmers southward from the Nigeria/Cameroon border regions into western Central Africa. Did the farmers take advantage of a forest retreat driven by climate drying, or were they the primary cause of the forest loss? In recent years, there has been a vigorous debate on the cause of the LHRC. Now, Garcin et al. (3) provide new data and an unexpected new insight, presenting strong evidence that there was no strong drying event, and therefore suggesting that it was direct deforestation that caused this retreat of the Central African rainforests.

link.

paper link.

Better start rethinking the anthropocene, folks.

Human Caused Global Warming has Postponed the Next Glacial Cycle by at Least 50,000 Years

Humanity has become a geological force that is able to suppress the beginning of the next ice age, a study now published in the renowned scientific journal Nature shows. Cracking the code of glacial inception, scientists of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research found the relation of insolation and CO2 concentration in the atmosphere to be the key criterion to explain the last eight glacial cycles in Earth history. At the same time their results illustrate that even moderate human interference with the planet's natural carbon balance might postpone the next glacial inception by 100.000 years.

"Even without man-made climate change we would expect the beginning of a new ice age no earlier than in 50.000 years from now - which makes the Holocene as the present geological epoch an unusually long period in between ice ages," explains lead author Andrey Ganopolski. "However, our study also shows that relatively moderate additional anthropogenic CO2-emissions from burning oil, coal and gas are already sufficient to postpone the next ice age for another 50.000 years. The bottom line is that we are basically skipping a whole glacial cycle, which is unprecedented. It is mind-boggling that humankind is able to interfere with a mechanism that shaped the world as we know it."

For the first time, research can explain the onset of the past eight ice ages by quantifying several key factors that preceded the formation of each glacial cycle. "Our results indicate a unique functional relationship between summer insolation and atmospheric CO2 for the beginning of a large-scale ice-sheet growth which does not only explain the past, but also enables us to anticipate future periods when glacial inception might occur again," Ganopolski says.

link.

Au Contraire! The Holocene is NOT the Same as the Anthropocene

The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene

Authors:

Waters et al

Background:

Humans are altering the planet, including long-term global geologic processes, at an increasing rate. Any formal recognition of an Anthropocene epoch in the geological time scale hinges on whether humans have changed the Earth system sufficiently to produce a stratigraphic signature in sediments and ice that is distinct from that of the Holocene epoch. Proposals for marking the start of the Anthropocene include an “early Anthropocene” beginning with the spread of agriculture and deforestation; the Columbian Exchange of Old World and New World species; the Industrial Revolution at ~1800 CE; and the mid-20th century “Great Acceleration” of population growth and industrialization.

The Holocene and Anthropocene are Geologically Synomous (part two)

Holocene shifts in the assembly of plant and animal communities implicate human impacts

Authors:

Lyons et al

Abstract:

Understanding how ecological communities are organized and how they change through time is critical to predicting the effects of climate change1. Recent work documenting the co-occurrence structure of modern communities found that most significant species pairs co-occur less frequently than would be expected by chance. However, little is known about how co-occurrence structure changes through time. Here we evaluate changes in plant and animal community organization over geological time by quantifying the co-occurrence structure of 359,896 unique taxon pairs in 80 assemblages spanning the past 300 million years. Co-occurrences of most taxon pairs were statistically random, but a significant fraction were spatially aggregated or segregated. Aggregated pairs dominated from the Carboniferous period (307 million years ago) to the early Holocene epoch (11,700 years before present), when there was a pronounced shift to more segregated pairs, a trend that continues in modern assemblages. The shift began during the Holocene and coincided with increasing human population size and the spread of agriculture in North America. Before the shift, an average of 64% of significant pairs were aggregated; after the shift, the average dropped to 37%. The organization of modern and late Holocene plant and animal assemblages differs fundamentally from that of assemblages over the past 300 million years that predate the large-scale impacts of humans. Our results suggest that the rules governing the assembly of communities have recently been changed by human activity.

The Anthropocene is Geologically Synomous With the Holocene

A new analysis of the fossil record shows that a deep pattern in nature remained the same for 300 million years. Then, 6,000 years ago, the pattern was disrupted -- at about the same time that agriculture spread across North America.

"When early humans started farming and became dominant in the terrestrial landscape, we see this dramatic restructuring of plant and animal communities," said University of Vermont biologist Nicholas Gotelli, an expert on statistics and the senior author on the new study.

In the hunt for the beginning of the much-debated "Anthropocene" -- a supposed new geologic era defined by human influence of the planet -- the new research suggests a need to look back farther in time than the arrival of human-caused climate change, atomic weapons, urbanization or the industrial revolution.

link.

Keep in mind, the Holocene dates from 10k years ago.  4k years, in the geological sense, is nothing and probably would not be detectable in 5 million years in the future.  Furthermore, if the overkill hypothesis is correct, then the anthropocene started at the megafauna kills 10k years ago.  Gosh.  That's EXACTLY the Holocene.

The Holocene has priority based on publication date.

Let's stop using that stupid term.

Academic Bun Fight! Rewilding the "Anthropocene"

let's rewild!

Science for a wilder Anthropocene: Synthesis and future directions for trophic rewilding research

Authors:

Svenning et al

Abstract:

Trophic rewilding is an ecological restoration strategy that uses species introductions to restore top-down trophic interactions and associated trophic cascades to promote self-regulating biodiverse ecosystems. Given the importance of large animals in trophic cascades and their widespread losses and resulting trophic downgrading, it often focuses on restoring functional megafaunas. Trophic rewilding is increasingly being implemented for conservation, but remains controversial. Here, we provide a synthesis of its current scientific basis, highlighting trophic cascades as the key conceptual framework, discussing the main lessons learned from ongoing rewilding projects, systematically reviewing the current literature, and highlighting unintentional rewilding and spontaneous wildlife comebacks as underused sources of information. Together, these lines of evidence show that trophic cascades may be restored via species reintroductions and ecological replacements. It is clear, however, that megafauna effects may be affected by poorly understood trophic complexity effects and interactions with landscape settings, human activities, and other factors. Unfortunately, empirical research on trophic rewilding is still rare, fragmented, and geographically biased, with the literature dominated by essays and opinion pieces. We highlight the need for applied programs to include hypothesis testing and science-based monitoring, and outline priorities for future research, notably assessing the role of trophic complexity, interplay with landscape settings, land use, and climate change, as well as developing the global scope for rewilding and tools to optimize benefits and reduce human–wildlife conflicts. Finally, we recommend developing a decision framework for species selection, building on functional and phylogenetic information and with attention to the potential contribution from synthetic biology.

Rewilding is a really bad idea, has no data to support it and, at least so far, bad science:

From Pleistocene to trophic rewilding: A wolf in sheep’s clothing

Authors:

Rubenstein et al

Abstract:

Nearly 10 y ago, we (1) critiqued the idea of Pleistocene rewilding (2), a misguided attempt to resurrect bygone ecosystems. Much has happened to the Earth’s biodiversity over the decade since the term “Pleistocene rewilding” was coined, most of it bad. More than half a billion people have been added to the world’s population, and ecosystems continue to be degraded at an alarming rate. A sixth mass extinction is underway, and poaching of megafauna has increased across sub-Saharan Africa. Unfortunately, one thing that has not happened is any serious attempt to scientifically study Pleistocene rewilding. Despite a number of publicized Pleistocene rewilding projects (Oostvaardersplassen in The Netherlands and Pleistocene Park in Siberia), we have yet to see any quantitative data concerning the impacts of megafauna reintroductions.

Wait! There needs to be a shift from ideology to science for rewilding and it can work!

Reply to Rubenstein and Rubenstein: Time to move on from ideological debates on rewilding

Authors:

Svenning et al

Abstract:

In their comment (1) on our review and perspective on trophic rewilding science (2), Rubenstein and Rubenstein launch a critique not so much directed at our study as at trophic rewilding as a conservation approach. They first lament that Pleistocene rewilding has not been scientifically studied since the term was introduced. This is much in line with our study, where we conclude that empirical research on trophic rewilding is rare, fragmented, and geographically biased, with the literature dominated by essays and opinion pieces, and follow this up by providing recommendations for research opportunities and priorities. Rubenstein and Rubenstein (1) then claim that we repackage the concept of Pleistocene rewilding (3) under the new term “trophic rewilding,” defined as species introductions to restore top–down trophic interactions and associated trophic cascades to promote self-regulating biodiverse ecosystems (2). However, the two concepts are not identical. Notably, with the name and definition of trophic rewilding we provide emphasis on a clear, testable functional objective rather than on a certain time frame.

The "Mayacene:" How the Maya's Impact on Their Environment

Evidence from the tropical lowlands of Central America reveals how Maya activity more than 2,000 years ago not only contributed to the decline of their environment but continues to influence today's environmental conditions, according to researchers at The University of Texas at Austin.

Synthesizing old and new data, researchers were the first to show the full extent of the "Mayacene" as a microcosm of the early anthropocene -- a period when human activity began greatly affecting environmental conditions.

"Most popular sources talk about the anthropocene and human impacts on climate since the industrial revolution, but we are looking at a deeper history," said lead author Tim Beach, the C.B. Smith Sr. Centennial Professor of Geography and the Environment. "Though it has no doubt accelerated in the last century, humans' impact on the environment has been going on a lot longer."

By looking at Maya impacts on climate, vegetation, hydrology and lithosphere from 3,000 to 1,000 years ago, researchers propose that the Maya's advanced urban and rural infrastructure altered ecosystems within globally important tropical forests.

The researchers identified six stratigraphic markers -- or "golden spikes" -- that indicate a time of large-scale change, including: "Maya clay" rocks; unique soil sequences; carbon isotope ratios; widespread chemical enrichment; building remains and landscape modifications; and signs of Maya-induced climate change.

"These spikes give us insight into how and why Mayas interacted with their environment, as well as the scope of their activity," said Sheryl Luzzadder-Beach, co-author and chair of the Department of Geography and the Environment.

Maya clay and soil sequences indicated erosion, human land-use changes and periods of instability. Soil profiles near wetlands revealed heightened carbon isotope ratios due to agriculture and corn production; and researchers noted a three- to fourfold increase in phosphorus throughout Maya-age sediments.

However, the most visual indication of human impact was found in building material remains and landscape modifications. Researchers believe that these clues reveal how the Maya used water management to adapt to climate change.

link.

Academic Bun Fights! The Anthropocene!

Ruddiman et al think the anthropocene is a useful, necessary concept, but one which ought to remain someone nebulous, but the start ought to be 1945 (first atom bomb blast):

Defining the epoch we live in

Authors:

Ruddiman et al

Abstract:

Human alterations of Earth's environments are pervasive. Visible changes include the built environment, conversion of forests and grasslands to agriculture, algal blooms, smog, and the siltation of dams and estuaries. Less obvious transformations include increases in ozone, carbon dioxide (CO2), and methane (CH4) in the atmosphere, and ocean acidification. Motivated by the pervasiveness of these alterations, Crutzen and Stoermer argued in 2000 that we live in the “Anthropocene,” a time in which humans have replaced nature as the dominant environmental force on Earth (1). Many of these wide-ranging changes first emerged during the past 200 years and accelerated rapidly in the 20th century (2). Yet, a focus on the most recent changes risks overlooking pervasive human transformations of Earth's surface for thousands of years, with profound effects on the atmosphere, climate, and biodiversity.

OTOH, Lewis and crew think definitions are really important for science and if we're going to use the term 'anthropocene' we ought to it down to a formal start geologically & according to the GSSP standards:

Definitions are one of the bedrocks of science. However, W. F. Ruddiman et al. (“Defining the epoch we live in,” Perspectives, 3 April, p. 38) propose that the geological term Anthropocene should remain deliberately undefined and ambiguous. They recommend not formalizing the term because some inception dates miss important earlier human-induced environmental impacts, particularly widespread farming. We have sympathy for this view. However, defining the Anthropocene as a geological epoch must be based on evidence, including changes to the Earth system lasting millions of years and the existence of stratigraphic evidence marking such changes (1). All other geological time-units have agreed-upon dated markers or agreed-upon dates. The Anthropocene should not be treated differently.

link.

Certini et al agree with Lewis and crew about needing to make the anthropocene into something formal, but they suggest the anthropocene subsueme the holocene:

In their Perspective “Defining the epoch we live in” (3 April, p. 38), W. F. Ruddiman et al. write that in spite of its popularity, the Anthropocene still lacks an official onset. They propose that the term anthropocene be used informally (without the initial capital), which would avoid the constraints of a formal designation. We disagree.

[...]

Even if the impact of humans was not immediately major and uniform across the planet, what are a few thousand years of discrepancy between the end of the last glacial period and the dawn of the Anthropocene in comparison to the entire geological scale? Most transitions between the formally defined epochs would be much longer than the Holocene. Anthropocene seems a more reasonable name than Holocene for this combined time span, whose most characteristic trait is the human pressure on the planet. Holocene could possibly be the first stage of the Anthropocene, the one characterized by a soft and spotty human impact on Earth.

link.

Ruddiman counters the formalism is 'silly,' but does point out if the anthropocene is going to go formal, when to date it. The atom bomb or the start of the megafauna overkills?

Certini and scalenghe and Lewis and Maslin seem convinced that geoscience must rely heavily on formal stratigraphic nomenclature to move forward. This view likely originates from the centuries-long effort to compile the relative geologic age sequence, which was a monumental achievement, especially given religious and social opposition. The compilation required careful attention to stratigraphic principles such as superposition, index fossils, diachroneity, and facies changes. Over time, the findings became formalized in geologic nomenclature.

link.

Homo erectus and Environmental Change in the Beijing Plain: Benefactor or Driver?

Vegetation and climate change in the Beijing plain during the last million years and implications for Homo erectus occupation in North China

Authors:

Cai et al

Abstract:

Beijing is of great significance in human evolution studies. However, the lack of well-dated records of climate and environmental changes, which are frequently cited as important drivers of early human evolution, impede understanding of the evolution and dispersal of humans on the Beijing plain. A 150-m deep drill core was collected from the Changping District of the Beijing plain to reconstruct the changes in vegetation and climate during the Middle Pleistocene using pollen records. The results indicated that the tree genus Ulmus and the herb genus Artemisia were dominant in most of the samples from 0.96 to 0.61 Ma, reflecting an open forest steppe covering the Beijing region. Between 0.61 and 0.44 Ma, the vegetation communities shifted to an Artemisia-steppe as the tree cover declined. This was followed by a further shift in vegetation community structure to a Chenopodiaceae-Asteraceae steppe between 0.44 and 0.23 Ma, followed by the conversion to an Artemisia-Asteraceae steppe after 0.23 Ma. The pollen record revealed a long-term deterioration of the vegetation, which indicated an increasing trend of drying and cooling in the Beijing plain during the Middle Pleistocene. This coincides with the Homo erectus colonization of North China during this period. These findings provide supporting evidence that a shift in climate towards cold and dry conditions during the Middle Pleistocene may have directly benefited Homo erectus populations in open habitats of North China. This general pattern of declining vegetation cover in the study area is consistent with climatic and environmental patterns in other regions of North China, which were probably influenced by global cooling during the Middle Pleistocene.

Australian Lynch Crater Cautiously Hints Humanity Impacting Climate for last 45,000 Years

Contribution of organic matter molecular proxies to interpretation of the last 55 ka of the Lynch's Crater record (NE Australia)

Authors:

Kaal et al

Abstract:

The Lynch's Crater (NE Australia) deposit is a key information source on Late-Quaternary palaeoenvironmental change, including human-induced deforestation since the arrival of Aboriginals, megaherbivore extinction and southern hemisphere tropical climate dynamics. This study adds to the important dataset available for the site by assessing the molecular composition of organic matter in the record using pyrolysis–GC–MS to elucidate ecological and hydrological conditions since 55 ka BP.

Pyrolysates were dominated by methylene chain compounds (MCCs) and lignin products (methoxyphenols). Concomitant increases in MCCs and aquatic source indicators (biogenic opaline silica, Si:Al ratio, SEM-visible debris of sponges and diatoms and aquatic pollen taxa), which roughly coincide with abrupt climate events in GISP2 δ18O (Heinrich event H3, H1, 8.2 ka and oscillations at 33–36 ka BP), reflect transitions from peat (dominated by lignin from terrestrial plants) to lacustrine (MCCs from aquatic plants) conditions. The evidence points towards wet conditions causing the accumulation of layers rich in inorganic sediment during H events, favouring the hypothesis of a southward ITCZ shift, rather than an ENSO-induced northward shift, as the underlying mechanism. This contradicts previous studies using the “degree of peat humification” index (DPH). We measured DPH and the extracts and residues by PY–GC–MS, to better understand the validity of this surface moisture proxy. Paradoxically, high DPH corresponds to the relatively young (less than 15 ka) ombrotrophic peat environment, as DPH relies on the proportion of extractable carbohydrates concentrated in this part of the core, while deeper and unarguably more evolved layers are comprised of alkali-inextricable lignin and MCCs. Therefore, DPH does not accurately reflect humidity-controlled degradation/preservation dynamics and its use for studying climate change in complex records, such as Lynch's Crater, is cautioned. Finally, the decoupling of humidity conditions from changes in regional arboreal vegetation supports the hypothesis of an anthropogenic- rather than climate-driven shift towards sclerophyllous vegetation since 45 ka, but the hydroseral complexity of the system demands caution on this matter.

This is why I think the anthropocene idea is stupid.  This is another case where humanity has been impacting the climate long before the inane date of the modern concept.  In fact, there are suggestions humanity, whatever species you call us, has been doing so since we harnessed fire: Homo erectus may have been clearing forests intentionally for better habitat. 

Chinese Have Been Radically Changing Their Environment for at Least 3,000 Years

For thousands of years, Mother Nature has taken the blame for tremendous human suffering caused by massive flooding along the Yellow River, long known in China as the "River of Sorrow" and "Scourge of the Sons of Han."

Now, new research from Washington University in St. Louis links the river's increasingly deadly floods to a widespread pattern of human-caused environmental degradation and related flood-mitigation efforts that began changing the river's natural flow nearly 3,000 years ago.

"Human intervention in the Chinese environment is relatively massive, remarkably early and nowhere more keenly witnessed than in attempts to harness the Yellow River," said T.R. Kidder, PhD, lead author of the study and an archaeologist at Washington University.

"In some ways, these findings offer a new benchmark for the beginning of the Anthropocene, the epoch in which humans became the most dominant global force in nature."

Forthcoming in the Journal of Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, the study offers the earliest known archaeological evidence for human construction of large-scale levees and other flood-control systems in China.

link.

Humanity has Ended the Ice Age

Damping of glacial-interglacial cycles from anthropogenic forcing

Author:

Haqq-Misra

Abstract:

Climate variability over the past million years shows a strong glacial-interglacial cycle of ~100,000 years as a combined result of Milankovitch orbital forcing and climatic resonance. It has been suggested that anthropogenic contributions to radiative forcing may extend the length of the present interglacial, but the effects of anthropogenic forcing on the periodicity of glacial-interglacial cycles has received little attention. Here I demonstrate that moderate anthropogenic forcing can act to damp this 100,000 year cycle and reduce climate variability from orbital forcing. Future changes in solar insolation alone will continue to drive a 100,000 year climate cycle over the next million years, but the presence of anthropogenic warming can force the climate into an ice-free state that only weakly responds to orbital forcing. Sufficiently strong anthropogenic forcing that eliminates the glacial-interglacial cycle may serve as an indication of an epoch transition from the Pleistocene to the Anthropocene.

Humanity's Unique Fossil Foot Print in the Geological Record

A new study by an international team of scientists, including Dr Jan Zalasiewicz and Professor Mark Williams of the University of Leicester's Department of Geology, suggests that the fossil impact humans have made on the planet is vast and unprecedented in nature – and that there's been nothing remotely like it since the Earth formed, over four and half billion years ago.

The study, entitled 'The technofossil record of humans' and published by SAGE in The Anthropocene Review, argues that, like dinosaurs, who left their bones and footprints behind for future generations to discover, humans will also leave a footprint behind – one made up of material goods unique to mankind that are so different from anything else produced by animals in the history of the Earth that they deserve their own name: technofossils.

Dr Zalasiewicz said: "Palaeontologists call preserved animal-made structures trace fossils. Most animal species make only one – or at most a very few – different types of trace. For example, dinosaurs made footprints and worms leave burrows. Just one species, though, Homo sapiens, now manufactures literally millions of different types of traces that range from nano-scale to city-sized.

"Whereas trace fossils such as animal burrows changed their pattern with geological slowness, over millions of years, as the organisms that produced them evolved, the things that humans manufacture now evolve with lightning speed, as our factories bring new goods to the market each year – and make old ones obsolete. Many of the cast-off objects that now litter the landscape will become buried in sediment – and will be well on the way to becoming technofossils."

The study suggests that humanity's equivalent of the dinosaur's footprint will be in the form of a wide array of technofossils such as motorways, cities, airports, toothbrushes, ballpoint pens and mobile phones – everything that we build or manufacture.

link.

The Forests of SE Asia Have Been Undergoing Anthropic Modification Since at Least the Beginning of the Holocene

New research from Queen's University Belfast shows that the tropical forests of South East Asia have been shaped by humans for the last 11,000 years.

The rain forests of Borneo, Sumatra, Java, Thailand and Vietnam were previously thought to have been largely unaffected by humans, but the latest research from Queen's Palaeoecologist Dr Chris Hunt suggests otherwise.

A major analysis of vegetation histories across the three islands and the SE Asian mainland has revealed a pattern of repeated disturbance of vegetation since the end of the last ice age approximately 11,000 years ago.

The research, which was funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council and the British Academy, is being published in the Journal of Archaeological Science. It is the culmination of almost 15 years of field work by Dr Hunt, involving the collection of pollen samples across the region, and a major review of existing palaeoecology research, which was completed in partnership with Dr Ryan Rabett from Cambridge University.

Evidence of human activity in rainforests is extremely difficult to find and traditional archaeological methods of locating and excavating sites are extremely difficult in the dense forests. Pollen samples, however, are now unlocking some of the region's historical secrets.

Dr Hunt, who is Director of Research on Environmental Change at Queen's School of Geography, Archaeology and Palaeoecology, said: "It has long been believed that the rainforests of the Far East were virgin wildernesses, where human impact has been minimal. Our findings, however, indicate a history of disturbances to vegetation. While it could be tempting to blame these disturbances on climate change, that is not the case as they do not coincide with any known periods of climate change. Rather, these vegetation changes have been brought about by the actions of people.

"There is evidence that humans in the Kelabit Highlands of Borneo burned fires to clear the land for planting food-bearing plants. Pollen samples from around 6,500 years ago contain abundant charcoal, indicating the occurrence of fire. However, while naturally occurring or accidental fires would usually be followed by specific weeds and trees that flourish in charred ground, we found evidence that this particular fire was followed by the growth of fruit trees. This indicates that the people who inhabited the land intentionally cleared it of forest vegetation and planted sources of food in its place.

"One of the major indicators of human action in the rainforest is the sheer prevalence of fast-growing 'weed' trees such as Macaranga, Celtis and Trema. Modern ecological studies show that they quickly follow burning and disturbance of forests in the region.

"Nearer to the Borneo coastline, the New Guinea Sago Palm first appeared over 10,000 years ago. This would have involved a voyage of more than 2,200km from its native New Guinea, and its arrival on the island is consistent with other known maritime voyages in the region at that time – evidence that people imported the Sago seeds and planted them."

link.

Nonspecialist Mammals Will Come Out Best in Future Climate Change

Future Climate Change Will Favour Non-Specialist Mammals in the (Sub)Arctics

Authors:

Hof et al

Abstract:

Arctic and subarctic (i.e., [sub]arctic) ecosystems are predicted to be particularly susceptible to climate change. The area of tundra is expected to decrease and temperate climates will extend further north, affecting species inhabiting northern environments. Consequently, species at high latitudes should be especially susceptible to climate change, likely experiencing significant range contractions. Contrary to these expectations, our modelling of species distributions suggests that predicted climate change up to 2080 will favour most mammals presently inhabiting (sub)arctic Europe. Assuming full dispersal ability, most species will benefit from climate change, except for a few cold-climate specialists. However, most resident species will contract their ranges if they are not able to track their climatic niches, but no species is predicted to go extinct. If climate would change far beyond current predictions, however, species might disappear. The reason for the relative stability of mammalian presence might be that arctic regions have experienced large climatic shifts in the past, filtering out sensitive and range-restricted taxa. We also provide evidence that for most (sub)arctic mammals it is not climate change per se that will threaten them, but possible constraints on their dispersal ability and changes in community composition. Such impacts of future changes in species communities should receive more attention in literature.

Is The "Anthropocene" Going to INCREASE Biodiversity?!

Human activity changes the environment, as last week’s release of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reminds us. But not all change is bad. One way in which animals and plants respond to warming temperatures, for example, is to move beyond their historical distributions, just as they do when they are transported to new regions by humans. The response of people who find themselves ‘invaded’ by such ‘displaced’ species is often irrational. Deliberate persecution of the new — just because it is new — is no longer sustainable in a world of rapid global change.

It is true that some invasive species damage ecosystems and can eradicate resident species. As a result, the European Commission, for example, is planning laws to control the ‘adverse’ impacts of species introduced through human activities, albeit without quite saying how those impacts should be defined. But the same process can also increase ecological diversity. On average, less than one native species dies out for each introduced species that arrives. Britain, for instance, has gained 1,875 established non-native species without yet losing anything to the invaders.

Human development — dubbed the age of the Anthropocene — boosts biodiversity in other ways too.

eyebrow raising link.