Slowdown of Global Warming Is Disproved (Yet Again)
Once upon a time, mariners measured ocean temperatures by scooping up a bucket of seawater and lowering a thermometer into it. In the 1950s, ships began to measure water as it was piped through their engine rooms. Today, buoys covering much of the ocean are supplanting ship-based data collection. They report slightly cooler temperatures, because they measure water directly from the ocean rather than water that has passed through the warmth of an engine room. These modern measurements reveal that oceans have warmed more than was previously thought.
After correcting for the “cold bias,” researchers with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) concluded that the oceans have actually warmed 0.12 degrees Celsius (0.22 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade since 2000, nearly twice as fast as earlier estimates of 0.07 degrees Celsius per decade. This brought the rate of ocean temperature rise in line with estimates for the previous 30 years, between 1970 and 1999.
Published in 2015, the NOAA research was controversial, because it eliminated much of the “global warming hiatus,” an apparent slowdown in rising ocean-surface temperatures between 1998 and 2012. Many scientists, including the International Panel on Climate Change, had previously acknowledged the puzzling hiatus, while those dubious about global warming pointed to it as evidence that climate change is a hoax.
Now, independent data gathered by researchers from UC Berkeley and Berkeley Earth—using satellites and robotic floats as well as buoys—confirms that the NOAA results were correct. The new study was published January 4 in the online, open-access journal Science Advances.
“Our results mean that essentially NOAA got it right, that they were not cooking the books,” said lead author Zeke Hausfather, a graduate student in the Energy & Resources Group. “In the grand scheme of things, the main implication of our study is on the hiatus, which many people have focused on, claiming that global warming has slowed greatly or even stopped. Based on our analysis, a good portion of that apparent slowdown in warming was due to biases in the ship records.”
Science on—and for— Our National Parks
In anticipation of the 2016 national parks centennial, UC Berkeley’s 2015 “Science for Parks, Parks for Science” summit had two main goals: first, to commemorate the 1915 UC Berkeley conference that catalyzed the creation of the National Park Service; second, to convene thought leaders to envision strategies for a second century of science on parks and their critical relationship to people and biodiversity.
The summit’s presentations are compiled in a new book, Science, Conservation, and National Parks, available now from the University of Chicago Press. Examining the major challenges confronting parks and protected areas throughout the world—including how to best engage people in parks—the book’s contributors address key conservation and stewardship issues including climate change, pollution, invasive species, and the rapid loss of biodiversity.
Environmental Science, Policy, and Management professor Steven Beissinger co-edited the book with David Ackerly (integrative biology), Holly Doremus (law), and Gary Machlis (professor of environmental sustainability at Clemson University and science adviser to the director of the National Park Service).
Climate Change Could Kill Off Parasites, Destabilizing Ecosystems
Photogenic animals, from polar bears to people, aren’t the only creatures under threat from global climate change. A new review by CNR researchers suggests that the phenomenon also threatens parasites with extinction, which could have big consequences for ecosystems.
A vast majority of the research into parasites and environmental change focuses on how hosts, particularly humans, will be harmed. But few studies have addressed how the loss of parasite biodiversity may affect ecosystem connectedness, and health and biodiversity as a whole.
Now, research co-authored by postdoctoral researcher Carrie Cizauskas and graduate student Colin Carlson—both in the lab of ESPM professor Wayne Getz—suggests that parasites are as prone to extinction due to climate change as any other organism. The study, which was published January 12 in the journal Royal Society Open Science, predicts that losing parasites could destabilize ecosystems in many ways, such as by increasing more virulent disease, altering the food web, or changing host physiology.
Previous work from these researchers has called for further research into parasite vulnerability from parasites’ perspectives, rather than primarily focusing on hosts, and has also outlined ways to potentially conserve parasites. The new study outlines actionable items for researching the vulnerability of parasites. A forthcoming review from
Cizauskas and Carlson attempts to quantify parasite extinction risks using existing data and modeling.
“Ultimately, our goal is for this review to act as a catalyst for further research efforts and discussions regarding the important and little-addressed topic of parasite vulnerability in the face of climate change,” Cizauskas said.
Secrets of “Boy in the Bubble” Disease Are Revealed in a Single Genetic Mutation
Researchers at the College of Natural Resources were part of an interdisciplinary, international research team that identified the rare genetic mutation responsible for a unique case of “Boy in the Bubble” disease, or severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), a deadly immune system disorder. The researchers found that the cause was a mutated version of a gene called BCL11B, which also plays an unexpected role in the normal processes of immune system development. The study was published December 1 in the New England Journal of Medicine.
“This is a gene that had never been associated with SCID before, which required more advanced genome analysis techniques to discover,” said PMB professor Steven Brenner, a co-author of the study. “Moreover, unlike variants in every other known SCID gene, this mutation is dominant, which means you only need one copy of [it] to disrupt multiple aspects of development.”
The work signals the beginning of a new era of genomic medicine in which technology is enabling scientists to learn a great deal about a disease—and even new facts about normal biology—from a single patient. In this case, researchers were able to unearth the potentially unique underlying genetic cause of one patient’s disease and develop a deeper understanding of how the immune system develops.
New CRISPR Systems Found in Tiny Microbes
UC Berkeley scientists have discovered two simple systems similar to CRISPR-Cas9—a gene-editing tool that has revolutionized biology—in previously unexplored bacteria that have eluded efforts to grow them in the laboratory.
The new CRISPR systems are highly compact, befitting their presence in some of the smallest life-forms on the planet. If these systems can be reengineered as CRISPR-Cas9 has been, their small size could make them easier to insert into cells to edit DNA, expanding the gene-editing toolbox available to researchers and physicians.
“These are particularly interesting because the key proteins in these CRISPR systems appear to have the same role as Cas9, but are distinct from it. It’s part of a minimal system that has obvious potential for gene editing,” said Jill Banfield, a professor of environmental science, policy, and management (ESPM).
Banfield and Jennifer Doudna, a professor of molecular and cell biology (MCB), published a report on their discovery in the journal Nature in December 2016.
In CRISPR-Cas gene-editing systems, the Cas protein acts as the scissors. When targeted to a specific sequence of DNA, the Cas protein binds and severs double-stranded DNA. The new discovery nearly doubles the number of simple and compact CRISPR-Cas systems potentially useful as laboratory and biomedical tools.
CRISPR on Campus
The Innovative Genomics Institute was launched two years ago as a UC Berkeley–UCSF collaboration aimed at understanding how CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing can be used to develop new disease therapies. On January 25, the institute, which is directed by MCB professor Jennifer Doudna, announced a plan to invest $125 million into expanded research on the planet’s major crops and poorly understood microbiomes over the next five years. ESPM professor Jill Banfield will lead the microbiology group, and plant and microbial biology (PMB) professor Brian Staskawicz will direct the agricultural arm.