Home > Explore Data & Reports > Extending Vulnerability Assessment to Include Life Stages Considerations

Citation:

Hodgson, E.E., T.E. Essington, and I.C. Kaplan. 2016. Extending Vulnerability Assessment to Include Life Stages Considerations. PLoS ONE, 11(7):e0158917. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158917

Data/Report Type:

Sponsored Research

Description

Species are experiencing a suite of novel stressors from anthropogenic activities that have impacts at multiple scales. Vulnerability assessment is one tool to evaluate the likely impacts that these stressors pose to species so that high-vulnerability cases can be identified and prioritized for monitoring, protection, or mitigation. Commonly used semi-quantitative methods lack a framework to explicitly account for differences in exposure to stressors and organism responses across life stages. Here we propose a modification to commonly used spatial vulnerability assessment methods that includes such an approach, using ocean acidification in the California Current as an illustrative case study. Life stage considerations were included by assessing vulnerability of each life stage to ocean acidification and were used to estimate population vulnerability in two ways. We set population vulnerability equal to: (1) the maximum stage vulnerability and (2) a weighted mean across all stages, with weights calculated using Lefkovitch matrix models. Vulnerability was found to vary across life stages for the six species explored in this case study: two krill–Euphausia pacifica and Thysanoessa spinifera, pteropod–Limacina helicina, pink shrimp–Pandalus jordani, Dungeness crab–Metacarcinus magister and Pacific hake–Merluccius productus. The maximum vulnerability estimates ranged from larval to subadult and adult stages with no consistent stage having maximum vulnerability across species. Similarly, integrated vulnerability metrics varied greatly across species. A comparison showed that some species had vulnerabilities that were similar between the two metrics, while other species’ vulnerabilities varied substantially between the two metrics. These differences primarily resulted from cases where the most vulnerable stage had a low relative weight. We compare these methods and explore circumstances where each method may be appropriate.

Note to readers with disabilities: Some scientific publications linked from this website may not conform to Section 508 accessibility standards due to the complexity of the information being presented. If you need assistance accessing this electronic content, please contact the lead/corresponding author, Primary Contact, or nccos.webcontent@noaa.gov.

Explore Similar Data/Reports
NCCOS-with-tag-to-side-bld

NCCOS delivers ecosystem science solutions for stewardship of the nation’s ocean and coastal resources, in direct support of NOS priorities, offices, and customers, and to sustain thriving coastal communities and economies.

National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science
1305 East West Highway, Rm 8110
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Phone: (240) 533-0300 / Fax: (301) 713-4353
Email: nccos.webcontent@noaa.gov

    Sign Up for Our Quarterly Newsletter