TY - JOUR A1 - Hermanussen, Michael A1 - Scheffler, Christiane A1 - Martin, Lidia A1 - Groth, Detlef A1 - Waxmonsky, James G. A1 - Swanson, James A1 - Nowak-Szczepanska, Natalia A1 - Gomula, Aleksandra A1 - Apanasewicz, Anna A1 - Konarski, Jan M. A1 - Malina, Robert M. A1 - Bartkowiak, Sylwia A1 - Lebedeva, Lidia A1 - Suchomlinov, Andrej A1 - Konstantinov, Vsevolod A1 - Blum, Werner A1 - Limony, Yehuda A1 - Chakraborty, Raja A1 - Kirchengast, Sylvia A1 - Tutkuviene, Janina A1 - Jakimaviciene, Egle Marija A1 - Cepuliene, Ramune A1 - Franken, Daniel A1 - Navazo, Bárbara A1 - Moelyo, Annang G. A1 - Satake, Takashi A1 - Koziel, Slawomir ED - Scheffler, Christiane ED - Koziel, Slawomir ED - Hermanussen, Michael ED - Bogin, Barry T1 - Growth, Nutrition and Economy BT - Proceedings of the 27th Aschauer Soiree, held at Krobielowice, Poland, November 16th 2019 T2 - Human Biology and Public Health N2 - Twenty-three scientists met at Krobielowice, Poland to discuss the role of growth, nutrition and economy on body size. Contrasting prevailing concepts, re-analyses of studies in Indonesian and Guatemalan school children with high prevalence of stunting failed to provide evidence for an association between nutritional status and body height. Direct effects of parental education on growth that were not transmitted via nutrition were shown in Indian datasets using network analysis and novel statistical methods (St. Nicolas House Analysis) that translate correlation matrices into network graphs. Data on Polish children suggest significant impact of socioeconomic sensitivity on child growth, with no effect of maternal money satisfaction. Height and maturation tempo affect the position of a child among its peers. Correlations also exist between mood disorders and height. Secular changes in height and weight varied across decades independent of population size. Historic and recent Russian data showed that height of persons whose fathers performed manual work were on average four cm shorter than persons whose fathers were high-degree specialists. Body height, menarcheal age, and body proportions are sensitive to socioeconomic variables. Additional topics included delayed motherhood and its associations with newborn size; geographic and socioeconomic indicators related to low birth weight, prematurity and stillbirth rate; data on anthropometric history of Brazil, 1850-1950; the impact of central nervous system stimulants on the growth of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; and pituitary development and growth hormone secretion. Final discussions debated on reverse causality interfering between social position, and adolescent growth and developmental tempo. KW - nutrition KW - stunting KW - socioeconomy KW - education KW - secular changes KW - pubertal timing Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.52905/hbph.v1.1 SN - 2748-9957 VL - 2021 IS - 1 SP - 1 EP - 13 PB - Universitätsverlag Potsdam CY - Potsdam ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Romero-Mujalli, Daniel A1 - Rochow, Markus A1 - Kahl, Sandra M. A1 - Paraskevopoulou, Sofia A1 - Folkertsma, Remco A1 - Jeltsch, Florian A1 - Tiedemann, Ralph T1 - Adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity in changing environments: Implications for sexual species with different life history strategies JF - Ecology and Evolution N2 - Populations adapt to novel environmental conditions by genetic changes or phenotypic plasticity. Plastic responses are generally faster and can buffer fitness losses under variable conditions. Plasticity is typically modeled as random noise and linear reaction norms that assume simple one-to- one genotype–phenotype maps and no limits to the phenotypic response. Most studies on plasticity have focused on its effect on population viability. However, it is not clear, whether the advantage of plasticity depends solely on environmental fluctuations or also on the genetic and demographic properties (life histories) of populations. Here we present an individual-based model and study the relative importance of adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity for populations of sexual species with different life histories experiencing directional stochastic climate change. Environmental fluctuations were simulated using differentially autocorrelated climatic stochasticity or noise color, and scenarios of directiona climate change. Nonadaptive plasticity was simulated as a random environmental effect on trait development, while adaptive plasticity as a linear, saturating, or sinusoidal reaction norm. The last two imposed limits to the plastic response and emphasized flexible interactions of the genotype with the environment. Interestingly, this assumption led to (a) smaller phenotypic than genotypic variance in the population (many-to- one genotype–phenotype map) and the coexistence of polymorphisms, and (b) the maintenance of higher genetic variation—compared to linear reaction norms and genetic determinism—even when the population was exposed to a constant environment for several generations. Limits to plasticity led to genetic accommodation, when costs were negligible, and to the appearance of cryptic variation when limits were exceeded. We found that adaptive plasticity promoted population persistence under red environmental noise and was particularly important for life histories with low fecundity. Populations produing more offspring could cope with environmental fluctuations solely by genetic changes or random plasticity, unless environmental change was too fast. KW - developmental canalization KW - environmental change KW - genetic accommodation KW - Individual-based models KW - limits KW - many-to-one genotype–phenotype map KW - noise color KW - phenotypic plasticity KW - reaction norms KW - stochastic fluctuations Y1 - 2020 SN - 2045-7758 VL - 11 IS - 11 PB - John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CY - New Jersey ER - TY - GEN A1 - Romero-Mujalli, Daniel A1 - Rochow, Markus A1 - Kahl, Sandra M. A1 - Paraskevopoulou, Sofia A1 - Folkertsma, Remco A1 - Jeltsch, Florian A1 - Tiedemann, Ralph T1 - Adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity in changing environments: Implications for sexual species with different life history strategies T2 - Postprints der Universität Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe N2 - Populations adapt to novel environmental conditions by genetic changes or phenotypic plasticity. Plastic responses are generally faster and can buffer fitness losses under variable conditions. Plasticity is typically modeled as random noise and linear reaction norms that assume simple one-to- one genotype–phenotype maps and no limits to the phenotypic response. Most studies on plasticity have focused on its effect on population viability. However, it is not clear, whether the advantage of plasticity depends solely on environmental fluctuations or also on the genetic and demographic properties (life histories) of populations. Here we present an individual-based model and study the relative importance of adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity for populations of sexual species with different life histories experiencing directional stochastic climate change. Environmental fluctuations were simulated using differentially autocorrelated climatic stochasticity or noise color, and scenarios of directiona climate change. Nonadaptive plasticity was simulated as a random environmental effect on trait development, while adaptive plasticity as a linear, saturating, or sinusoidal reaction norm. The last two imposed limits to the plastic response and emphasized flexible interactions of the genotype with the environment. Interestingly, this assumption led to (a) smaller phenotypic than genotypic variance in the population (many-to- one genotype–phenotype map) and the coexistence of polymorphisms, and (b) the maintenance of higher genetic variation—compared to linear reaction norms and genetic determinism—even when the population was exposed to a constant environment for several generations. Limits to plasticity led to genetic accommodation, when costs were negligible, and to the appearance of cryptic variation when limits were exceeded. We found that adaptive plasticity promoted population persistence under red environmental noise and was particularly important for life histories with low fecundity. Populations produing more offspring could cope with environmental fluctuations solely by genetic changes or random plasticity, unless environmental change was too fast. T3 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe - 1170 KW - developmental canalization KW - environmental change KW - genetic accommodation KW - Individual-based models KW - limits KW - many-to-one genotype–phenotype map KW - noise color KW - phenotypic plasticity KW - reaction norms KW - stochastic fluctuations Y1 - 2020 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-523201 SN - 1866-8372 IS - 1170 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Warszawski, Lila A1 - Kriegler, Elmar A1 - Lenton, Timothy M. A1 - Gaffney, Owen A1 - Jacob, Daniela A1 - Klingenfeld, Daniel A1 - Koide, Ryu A1 - Costa, María Máñez A1 - Messner, Dirk A1 - Nakicenovic, Nebojsa A1 - Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim A1 - Schlosser, Peter A1 - Takeuchi, Kazuhiko A1 - van der Leeuw, Sander A1 - Whiteman, Gail A1 - Rockström, Johan T1 - All options, not silver bullets, needed to limit global warming to 1.5 °C BT - a scenario appraisal JF - Environmental research letters N2 - Climate science provides strong evidence of the necessity of limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, in line with the Paris Climate Agreement. The IPCC 1.5 °C special report (SR1.5) presents 414 emissions scenarios modelled for the report, of which around 50 are classified as '1.5 °C scenarios', with no or low temperature overshoot. These emission scenarios differ in their reliance on individual mitigation levers, including reduction of global energy demand, decarbonisation of energy production, development of land-management systems, and the pace and scale of deploying carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. The reliance of 1.5 °C scenarios on these levers needs to be critically assessed in light of the potentials of the relevant technologies and roll-out plans. We use a set of five parameters to bundle and characterise the mitigation levers employed in the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios. For each of these levers, we draw on the literature to define 'medium' and 'high' upper bounds that delineate between their 'reasonable', 'challenging' and 'speculative' use by mid century. We do not find any 1.5 °C scenarios that stay within all medium upper bounds on the five mitigation levers. Scenarios most frequently 'over use' CDR with geological storage as a mitigation lever, whilst reductions of energy demand and carbon intensity of energy production are 'over used' less frequently. If we allow mitigation levers to be employed up to our high upper bounds, we are left with 22 of the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios with no or low overshoot. The scenarios that fulfil these criteria are characterised by greater coverage of the available mitigation levers than those scenarios that exceed at least one of the high upper bounds. When excluding the two scenarios that exceed the SR1.5 carbon budget for limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, this subset of 1.5 °C scenarios shows a range of 15–22 Gt CO2 (16–22 Gt CO2 interquartile range) for emissions in 2030. For the year of reaching net zero CO2 emissions the range is 2039–2061 (2049–2057 interquartile range). KW - climate change KW - emissions scenarios KW - 1.5 ◦C KW - negative emissions Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abfeec SN - 1748-9326 N1 - Corrigendum: 10.1088/1748-9326/acbf6a VL - 16 IS - 6 PB - IOP Publishing CY - Bristol ER -