Unless greenhouse gas emissions are reduced, the Siberia tundra will disappear by 2500.
Even in the best-case scenarios, two-thirds of the landscape could disappear, leaving behind two separate fragments.
Warming worldwide could be accelerated by the release of vast quantities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere when the tundra's permafrost cover is gone.
The Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) Helmholtz Centre for polar and Marine Research was able to see how quickly the tundra will be turned over to forest.
According to Live Science, the loss of the tundra will be a blow for biodiversity and human culture, as well as worsening the effects of climate change.
Warming in the northern part of the world is twice as fast as it is in the rest of the world. According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, air temperatures in the northern part of the country rose over the course of 60 years. The heat is affecting the land in the north. The northward march of Siberia larch forests is one of the implications.
How quickly the tundra will be replaced is not known. Changes in treeline are not consistent around the world.
The treelines have moved northward. They have remained static in others and retreated in others. There can be a lot of variability from location to location and previous research focused on small areas.
A new computer model has been created by Kruse and Herzschuh to evaluate the entire expanse of Siberia.
The life cycles of individual trees are taken into account in the model, from how far they can spread their seeds to how well they grow when faced with competition from other trees.
The researchers found that once the trees start marching northward, they do so quickly and are not likely to retreat again. Under a scenario in which global temperature rise remains below 3.6 degrees F (2 degrees C) and carbon emissions are reduced to zero by the year 2200, only a third of today's tundra will remain.
One of the mini-tundras would be in Chukotka in the far east and the other in the far north.
The outcome for the tundra could be much worse if there was no quick action.
In an intermediate scenario in which carbon emissions don't decline until 2050 and are cut by half by the year 2200, larch trees would cover all but 5.7 percent of the current tundra.
The researchers reported in the journal eLife that trees could spread northward by as much as 18.6 miles.
The treeline did not retreat as quickly if the temperature dropped after the tundra became a forest. A lot of mature trees can be established.
Scientists warned about climate change.
The study didn't directly model what might happen to tundra dwellers, such as reindeer, but splitting populations into two regions, where they are cut off from interbreeding, is a bad idea.
It's not known how forest expansion may affect the life cycles of reindeer, who migrate from north to south and back again during the year.
Humans are likely to feel the impact. The people of northwest Siberia herd and hunt reindeer.
The culture is dependent on the land. It will be a big loss for humanity if this is lost.
It's not clear how the loss of the tundra will affect future warming, but covering the mossy, scrubby grassland with tall trees could make things worse. The larch forest canopy is lighter in color than the snow-covered tundra, which could make it hotter.
The melting of the tundra's permafrost, which stores huge amounts of greenhouse gases, could be intensified by this extra heat. These gases could be released as a result of the thaw.
The replacement of tundra with larch trees won't be the end of change. evergreen trees can move in as the temperatures warm up.
The leaf-covered trees absorb more heat than larch do. The southern side of the taiga, where temperatures are already higher than in the north, will likely heat up even more, leading to drought and fires.
There are compelling reasons to reduce fossil fuel emissions.
The model used in the study can be used to identify the most resistant parts of the tundra. The areas with resilience could be prioritized.
Reducing global greenhouse gas emissions is the best way to savesay savesay. If we can't do that, we need to do species conservativism.
There are related content.
Global warming is a question.
Climate milestone reached in 2021.
Climate change may be running out of time.
The original article was published by Live Science. The original article can be found here.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
