Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
July 28, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

Truthdig Bazaar
The Killing House

The Killing House

Chris Mooney

World Without Fish

World Without Fish

Mark Kurlansky

more items

Email this item Print this item

Be Small, Stay Cool, Forget the Climate

Posted on Jan 26, 2014

Powhusku (CC BY 2.0)

By Tim Radford, Climate News Network

This piece first appeared at Climate News Network.

Square, Story page, 2nd paragraph, mobile
LONDON—When it comes to climate change, small could be beautiful. Christy McCain of the University of Colorado Boulder looked at more than 1,000 scientific studies of mammalian behaviour and responses to climate change in North America and came to one big conclusion: bigger animals are more likely to experience stress than the smaller ones. A tiny shrew in the American forests was 27 times less likely to respond to climate change than a moose not far away.

She settled on 140 scientific papers that contained population responses from 73 North American mammal species, and examined a number of observations that could be called a response. Was there some sort of local extinction? Did the creature’s range contract, did it shift, did the species numbers increase? Did seasonal behaviour betray any change? Was there any variation in body size? Or in genetic diversity?

She and her colleague Sarah King report in Global Change Biology that only about half of the mammals responded as expected to climate change; 7% did the opposite of what might be expected and the remaining 41% betrayed no response. Those characteristics that indicated a response to climate change were large body size and restricted times in the day when a mammal might be active.

Tailored conservation


Square, Site wide, Desktop


Square, Site wide, Mobile
Almost all the large mammals responded negatively to the gradual warming and seasonal shifts of recent decades. Mammals active only in the daylight, or only at night, were twice as likely to respond as mammals that had a more flexible approach to time-keeping.

Mammals in the high latitudes, or at high elevation ranges – polar bears in the first case, American pikas and shadow chipmunks in the second – were also more likely to be in some way affected than those further south or further downhill. Small mammals however seemed to be able to exploit a wider range of micro-climates – shady patches, burrows and so on – to shelter from the effects of climate change.

“Overall the study suggests our large charismatic fauna – animals like foxes, elk, reindeer and bighorn sheep – may be more at risk from climate change”, said Dr McCain. “If we can determine which mammals are responding to climate change and the ones that are at risk of disappearing, then we can tailor conservation efforts toward those individual species.”

Banner, End of Story, Desktop
Banner, End of Story, Mobile

Watch a selection of Wibbitz videos based on Truthdig stories:

Get a book from one of our contributors in the Truthdig Bazaar.

Related Entries

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every day.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook