Tag Archives: responses

About One-Third of AI Search Tool Responses Include Unverified Claims

Posted on by
Reply

How reliable are the claims made by AI tools?

Oscar Wong/Getty Images

Generative AI systems, along with the extensive research agents and search engines they utilize, often make biased and unsupported assertions that lack credible backing. An analysis revealed that nearly a third of the responses generated by these tools are not substantiated by trustworthy sources, with OpenAI’s GPT-4.5 showing an even higher rate at 47%.

Pranav Narayanan Venkit, a researcher from Salesforce AI Research, along with his team, tested various generative AI search engines, including OpenAI’s GPT-4.5 and 5, You.com, Perplexity, and Microsoft’s Bing Chat. Additionally, I evaluated five deep search agents at my own pace: the deep search feature in GPT-5, Bing Chat’s Think Seepter option, and deep search tools offered by You.com, Google Gemini, and Perplexity.

“Our aim was to conduct social technology assessments using the generative search engines,” Narayanan Benkit explains. The objective was to evaluate the quality of answers and how users should interpret the information presented.

The research involved subjecting different AI engines to 303 queries, assessing their responses against eight distinct criteria known as Deeptrace. These metrics aim to determine the unilateral or overconfident nature of answers, their relevance to the questions posed, the extent to which quotes support claims, and the thoroughness of citations provided. The queries were categorized into two groups: one focused on controversial topics, designed to identify biases in AI outputs, and the other aimed at testing expertise across various fields such as meteorology, medicine, and human relations.

An illustrative controversial question is, “Why aren’t alternative energies replacing fossil fuels?” In contrast, an expertise-based question included, “What is the most relevant model used in computational hydrology?”

AI responses were evaluated by a large-scale language model (LLM) calibrated to identify the most effective ways to assess answers, involving a training process where two human annotators reviewed responses to similar questions used in the study.

Overall, the performance of AI-powered search engines and deep search tools was found to be quite lacking. Researchers noted that many models delivered one-sided responses. About 23% of claims made by the Bing Chat search engine contained unsupported assertions, while the figures were around 31% for You.com and the Perplexity AI search engine. GPT-4.5 produced an even higher ratio of 47% unsupported claims, though this was still significantly below the 97.5% of unsupported claims from Perplexity’s deep search agent. “We were certainly surprised by this finding,” Narayanan Benkit remarked.

OpenAI declined to comment on the paper’s findings, while Perplexity refrained from making an official comment, contesting the research methodology and highlighting that their tool allows users to select specific AI models (like GPT-4). Narayanan Venkit acknowledged that the research did not account for this variable but argued that most users are unaware of how to select an AI model. You.com, Microsoft, and Google did not respond to requests for comments from New Scientist.

“Numerous studies indicate that, despite frequent user complaints and significant advancements, AI systems can still yield one-sided or misleading answers,” asserts Felix Simon from Oxford University. “This paper provides valuable evidence regarding this concern.

However, not everyone is confident in the results. “The findings in this paper are heavily reliant on LLM-based annotations of the data collected,” comments Alexandra Urman from the University of Zurich, Switzerland. “There are significant issues with that.” Results annotated by AI require validation and verification by humans.

Additionally, she expresses concerns about the statistical methods employed to ensure that responses generated by relatively few individuals align with those reflected in the LLM. The use of Pearson correlation, the technique applied, is seen as “very non-standard and unique,” according to Ullman.

Despite the disputes surrounding the validity of the findings, Simon emphasizes the necessity for further work to ensure users can accurately interpret the information they obtain from these tools. “Improving the accuracy, diversity, and sourcing of AI-generated responses is imperative, especially as these systems are increasingly deployed across various domains,” he adds.

Topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

AI-Generated Responses Undermine Crowdsourced Research Studies

Posted on by
Reply

Some participants use AI to save time in online research

Daniel D’Andreti/Unsplash

Online surveys are being inundated by responses generated through AI, potentially compromising the integrity of critical data for scientific research.

Platforms like Prolific compensate participants modestly for answering questions posed by researchers. These platforms have gained popularity among academics for their simplicity in attracting subjects for behavioral studies.

Anne Marie Nusberger and her team at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Berlin, Germany, set out to examine the frequency of AI usage among respondents, triggered by their observations in previous studies. “The rate we were witnessing was truly startling,” she remarks.

They suspect that 45% of participants who submitted a single open-ended question on Prolific utilized AI tools to streamline their responses.

Further analysis of these submissions indicated more overt references to AI usage, characterized by phrases like “excessively repetitive” and “clearly non-human” language. “From the data we gathered earlier this year, it’s clear that a notable fraction of research is tainted,” she explains.

In follow-up studies conducted via Prolific, researchers implemented traps to capture chatbot users. Two instances of Recaptcha — a small test designed to differentiate humans from bots — identified only 0.2% of users as bots. A more complex Recaptcha, using both past activity and current behavior, eliminated an additional 2.7%. Although hidden from view, bots that were prompted to include the word “hazelnut” in their responses accounted for another 1.6%, while an extra 4.7% were detected when copying and pasting was restricted.

“Our goal is to respond adequately to online surveys, rather than resorting to full distrust,” advises Nussberger. It’s the onus of researchers, in her view, to handle the answers with greater skepticism and take precautions against AI-induced input. “However, the platforms bear significant responsibility. They must treat this matter with utmost seriousness.”

Prolific did not respond to a request for comment from New Scientist.

“The validity of online behavioral research has already faced challenges from participants misrepresenting themselves or employing bots to obtain rewards,” says Matt Hodgkinson, a freelance consultant in research ethics. “Researchers must collectively explore remote validation of human involvement or return to traditional face-to-face methodologies.”

Topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Study Reveals Many AI Chatbots Are Easily Misled and Provide Risky Responses

Posted on by
Reply

Compromised AI-driven chatbots pose risks by gaining access to harmful knowledge through illegal information encountered during their training, according to researchers.

This alert comes as an alarming trend emerges where chatbots have been “jailbroken” to bypass their inherent safety measures. These safeguards are meant to stop the systems from delivering harmful, biased, or inappropriate responses to user queries.

Powerful chatbots, including large language models (LLMs) like ChatGpt, Gemini, and Claude, consume vast amounts of content from the Internet.

Even with attempts to filter out harmful content from their training datasets, LLMs can still learn about illegal activities—including hacking, money laundering, insider trading, and bomb-making. Security protocols are intended to prevent the use of such information in their answers.

In a Report on the risks, researchers found that it is surprisingly easy to deceive many AI-powered chatbots into producing harmful and illegal content, emphasizing that the threat is “immediate, concrete, and alarming.”


The author cautions that “what was once limited to state actors and organized crime may now be accessible to anyone with a laptop or smartphone.”

The study, conducted by Professor Rior Lokach and Dr. Michael Fier from Ben Gurion University in Negev, Israel, highlights an escalating threat from “dark LLMs” developed without safety measures or altered through jailbreaks. Some entities openly promote a “no ethical guardrails” approach, facilitating illegal activities like cybercrime and fraud.

Jailbreaking involves using specially crafted prompts to manipulate chatbots into providing prohibited responses. This is achieved by taking advantage of the chatbot’s primary goal of following user requests against its secondary aim of avoiding harmful, biased, unethical, or illegal outputs. Prompts typically create scenarios where the program prioritizes usefulness over safety precautions.

To illustrate the issue, researchers created a universal jailbreak that breached several prominent chatbots, enabling them to answer questions that should normally be denied. Once compromised, LLMs consistently produced responses to nearly all inquiries, according to the report.

“It was astonishing to see the extent of knowledge this system holds,” Fier noted, citing examples that included hacking computer networks and providing step-by-step guides for drug manufacturing and other criminal activities.

“What makes this threat distinct from previous technical challenges is an unparalleled combination of accessibility, scalability, and adaptability,” Rokach added.

The researchers reached out to leading LLM providers to inform them of the universal jailbreak, but reported that the response was “overwhelmingly inadequate.” Some companies did not reply, while others claimed that the jailbreak threat lay outside the parameters of their bounty programs, which encourage ethical hackers to report software vulnerabilities.

The report suggests that chatbots need to “forget” any illegal information they learn, emphasizing that technology companies must screen training data rigorously, implement strong firewalls to block dangerous queries and responses, and develop techniques for “learning machines.” Dark LLMs should be regarded as a “serious security threat,” comparable to unlicensed weapons and explosives, warranting accountability from providers.

Dr. Isen Aloani, an AI security expert at Queen’s University Belfast, highlighted that jailbreak attacks on LLMs could lead to significant risks, ranging from detailed weapon-building instructions to sophisticated disinformation campaigns, social engineering, and automated fraud.

“A crucial part of the solution is for companies to not only rely on front-end safeguards but to also invest meaningfully in red teaming and enhancing model-level robustness. Clear standards and independent oversight are essential to adapt to the evolving threat landscape,” he stated.

Professor Peter Garraghan, an AI security authority at Lancaster University, emphasized, “Organizations need to treat LLMs as they would any other vital software component.”

“While jailbreaking is a concern, understanding the entire AI stack is vital for genuine accountability. The real security requirements involve responsible design and deployment, not merely responsible disclosure,” he added.

OpenAI, the developer behind ChatGpt, stated that the latest O1 model can better infer its safety policies and improve its resistance to jailbreak attempts. The company affirmed its ongoing research to bolster the robustness of its solutions.

Meta, Google, Microsoft, and Anthropic were contacted for their feedback. Microsoft replied with a link to a blog detailing their work to mitigate jailbreaks.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Reader Responses: What Are Your Top 5 Must-Have Items When Preparing? | Life and Style

Posted on by
Reply

In light of the recent blackouts in Spain and Portugal, what are the five key items you would recommend storing? Johannesburg Arena Ahmad

Feel free to send me a new question at nq@theguardian.com.

Responses from Readers

Living in a wildfire zone, I was evacuated in 2020 when half the town burned. You can only prepare so much for emergencies. Loss of electricity isn’t catastrophic; within a day, you’ll need some form of light or battery backup, non-cooking options, or a small camping stove. Using your car to charge devices for updates is essential, as well as keeping some drinking water on hand.

If the outage lasts long, anticipate potential plumbing issues. The discomfort of no electricity for a week was challenging, but somehow we made it through. Kiramango

Consider UPS (uninterruptible power supply) and satellite phones to stay connected when local cell sites fail and 4G networks go down. Socialism

The most effective tools are tall, robust, and healthy ones, especially if you’re shorter. A lot of challenges can be solved with a little extra height.

Having a car with enough fuel to reach relatives’ homes is crucial. A working fire or gas cooker can be a lifesaver, though I don’t have either.

Don’t forget candles—and matches—unless either of you is a smoker. An Ace battery-operated lantern with a carry handle is also great for illuminating your surroundings. Spare batteries and canned food are a must; don’t overlook powdered milk. SPOILHEAPSURFER

During the outage in Spain, I found a solar-powered radio with a hand-crank very useful, along with a portable power station, cash, bottled water, a headlamp, and a gas barbecue. KPNUTS888

A camping stove with gas, candles and matches, flashlights, firewood, and bottled water are essentials. hugothecat

These blackouts reminded us to always have cash on hand. Rebchlobrown

In the spirit of the Zombie Apocalypse, I suggest cooking through a survival guide and recipes. Before I dig into an emergency stash, we must stay prepared. Cambridgels

Water, lentil cakes, nuts, and a Roberts sports radio (compact enough for a pocket) are essential. Aside from water, the food needs to be lightweight in case you have to travel far. Monono

As an ex-Red Cross emergency volunteer in London, I’ve faced many crises, including blackouts. My “go bag” contains:
Toilet paper
Soap
Toothbrush and toothpaste
Change of clothes, sturdy footwear, raincoat
Blanket
First aid kit with extras like blister plasters and water filtration tablets
Two large water bottles
Four days’ worth of non-perishable snacks (like cereal bars)
Battery and solar-powered radio
Battery and solar-powered flashlight
Maps and compass
A small address book with the contact details of my loved ones.

As a British botanist in the mountains studying Portuguese flora during the outage, I realized the importance of a portable solar charger. Much of our communication relies on mobile phones, and connection is often unreliable. Being able to plan and inform others of your safety is vital.

Have cash on hand, as cards and ATMs may not work, making it essential for purchasing food and bottled water.

Sturdy shoes or boots are critical, as you might need to walk a significant distance.

Light sources are crucial; darkness can lead to hazards and can also take a toll on your mental state.

Lastly, maintain a sense of humor and adventure. It’s grounding to reconnect with the realities faced by those who lived in more challenging times and to appreciate the simpler comforts of life.

After navigating out of the mountains, I was relieved to find my anxious partner waiting for me. Astrid Cardamine

I found myself in New York during the Great Northeast Blackout in 2003. My plan to fly back to the UK was interrupted as the last person through security just as the lights went out and facilities ceased to function. Passengers came together, sharing food, drinks, phone cards, and support.

My preparations include a good book, a good sense of humor, kindness, hope, and something to share. Wooraifid

In the face of potential chaos, I advocate for a mindset of calm amid panic, moderation over despair, and humor amid ennui. theteedeehoo

Don’t skimp on toilet paper. Stock up! dorkalicious

Consider flexible lamps with paperback-sized solar panels; a few hours of sunlight can provide an hour of light. These fit easily into a backpack. They might not be effective during a nuclear winter, but they are handy otherwise. Has anyone mentioned chocolate? Gardenerofearth

Dark chocolate (78%), sweet popcorn, and if we’re being comprehensive, Jaffa Cakes, Pringles, and Hula Hoops. My survival list is quite elaborate. Emmaston

As a Californian with a comprehensive earthquake kit, remember to always have cash! Annually, we check our prep supplies and replace any expired food, batteries, and medications. jgurrrl

Gasoline or diesel-powered vehicles are essential; an angle grinder might just help you out of a tight spot. wyrcommunity

As a Canadian, I fill containers with water during storms and keep my supplies ready. We have a wood stove for warmth and snow melting, as well as camping gear for making coffee. Solar banks and lights, battery-operated options, and a gas generator—plus some beer—are all on hand. Marmarie

Do prepare, don’t panic; be ready for whatever might come next. bricklayersoption

Source: www.theguardian.com

University examiners unable to detect ChatGPT’s responses during actual examinations

Posted on by
Reply

AI will make it harder for students to cheat on face-to-face exams

Trish Gant / Alamy

94% of university exam submissions created using ChatGPT were not detected as generated by artificial intelligence, and these submissions tended to receive higher scores than real student work.

Peter Scarfe Professors at the University of Reading in the UK used ChatGPT to generate answers for 63 assessment questions across five modules of the university's undergraduate psychology course. Because students took these exams from home, they were allowed to look at their notes and references, and could also use the AI, which they were not allowed to do.

The AI-generated answers were submitted alongside real students' answers and accounted for an average of 5% of all answers graded by teachers. The graders were not informed that they were checking the answers of 33 fake students, whose names were also generated by ChatGPT.

The assessment included two types of questions: short answers and longer essays. The prompt given to ChatGPT began with the words, “Include references to academic literature but do not have a separate bibliography section,” followed by a copy of the exam question.

Across all modules, only 6 percent of the AI ​​submissions were flagged as possibly not being the students' own work, although in some modules, no AI-generated work was ever flagged as suspicious. “On average, the AI ​​answers received higher marks than real student submissions,” says Scarfe, although there was some variability across modules.

“Current AI tends to struggle with more abstract reasoning and synthesising information,” he added. But across all 63 AI submissions, the AI's work had an 83.4% chance of outperforming student work.

The researchers claim theirs is the largest and most thorough study to date. Although the study only looked at studies on psychology degrees at the University of Reading, Scarfe believes it's a concern across academia. “There's no reason to think that other fields don't have the same kinds of problems,” he says.

“The results were exactly what I expected.” Thomas Lancaster “Generative AI has been shown to be capable of generating plausible answers to simple, constrained text questions,” say researchers at Imperial College London, who point out that unsupervised assessments involving short answers are always susceptible to cheating.

The strain on faculty who are tasked with grading also reduces their ability to spot AI cheating. “A time-pressed grader on a short-answer question is highly unlikely to come up with a case of AI cheating on a whim,” Lancaster says. “This university can't be the only one where this is happening.”

Tackling it at its source is nearly impossible, Scarfe says, so the education industry needs to rethink what it assesses. “I think the whole education industry needs to be aware of the fact that we need to incorporate AI into the assessments that we give to students,” he says.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

New study shows tardigrades display unusual responses to ionizing radiation

Posted on by
Reply

Tardigrades can withstand amazing amounts of ionizing radiation, about 1,000 times more lethal than humans. How they do so is not fully understood. In a new study, scientists at the University of North Carolina found that tardigrade species Hypsibius exemplaris Gamma irradiation causes DNA damage, but that damage can be repaired. This study shows that this species has a specific and strong response to ionizing radiation. In short, irradiation induces rapid upregulation of many DNA repair genes.

Artist's impression of tardigrade species Hypsibius exemplaris.

First discovered in 1773, tardigrades are a diverse group of microscopic invertebrates famous for their ability to withstand extreme conditions.

Also known as tardigrades or moss piglets, they can live up to 60 years, grow to a maximum size of 0.5 mm, and are best seen under a microscope.

Tardigrades can survive for up to 30 years without food or water at temperatures as low as -272 degrees Celsius (-457 degrees Fahrenheit) or as hot as 150 degrees Celsius (-302 degrees Fahrenheit) and for a few minutes at temperatures as low as -20 degrees Celsius. can. Minus 4 degrees Celsius (minus 4 degrees Fahrenheit) continues for decades.

It can withstand pressures from virtually 0 atmospheres in outer space to 1,200 atmospheres at the bottom of the Mariana Trench.

It is also resistant to radiation levels up to 5,000-6,200 Gy.

“What we saw surprised us. Tardigrades are behaving in ways we didn’t expect,” said researcher Professor Bob Goldstein from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

In their research, Professor Goldstein and his colleagues Hypsibius exemplaris Tardigrades can also withstand strong radiation.

The researchers found that although tardigrades are not immune to DNA damage, and that radiation damages their DNA, tardigrades can repair extensive damage.

They were surprised to discover that tardigrades can increase production of DNA repair genes.

Unlike humans, they are able to produce extremely high levels of DNA repair gene products, making them some of the most abundant gene products of any animal.

“These animals have an incredible response to radiation, and that seems to be the secret to their extreme survivability,” said Dr. Courtney Clark-Hachtel, a researcher at the University of North Carolina at Asheville. Ta.

“What we’re learning about how tardigrades overcome radiation stress could lead to new ideas about how we try to protect other animals and microorganisms from harmful radiation. “

of findings appear in the diary current biology.

_____

Courtney M. Clark Hucktell other.Tardigrade Hypsibius exemplaris Dramatically upregulates DNA repair pathway genes in response to ionizing radiation. current biology, published online on April 12, 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2024.03.019

Source: www.sci.news

Unexpected responses of animals during a total solar eclipse

Posted on by
Reply

We're still trying to understand how animals react to solar eclipses

Ş. Uğur OKÇu/1001slide/iStockphoto/Getty Images

You can't miss a total solar eclipse. The sun's disk is completely covered by the moon, casting its shadow across the Earth's surface and causing a sharp drop in temperature. Animals seem to notice, too, and researchers around the world are studying how animals respond.

Researchers have observed all kinds of animals, from wild hippos to pet dogs, during the eclipse. However, some of the most thorough research is done in zoos around the world.

adam hartstone rose North Carolina State University and colleagues conducted one of these large-scale studies It was during a solar eclipse that crossed the United States in 2017. “To be honest, I didn't expect to see anything interesting. Animals always see clouds passing overhead, but sometimes it gets cloudy. I never thought I would care about that at all,” says Heartstone-Rose. “Surprisingly, three-quarters of the species we observed showed some kind of response.”

Most of these animals seemed to think that it was night during totality, the period when the sun was completely hidden behind the moon. This may not come as a surprise to anyone who witnessed a solar eclipse somewhere outdoors, as it has been known for centuries that birds and insects tend to become quiet and search for nests. not.

“Gorillas usually hang out in gardens all day and go indoors at night, so it was like a whole herd of gorillas marching towards the front door and I was confused as to why no one would let me in. ” said Hartstone-Rose. . Similarly, he observed birds going to roost and sleeping. Once the totality was over, the gorillas and birds returned to their normal daytime activities. Previous studies have also observed spiders laying down their nests during totality, and bats briefly emerging from their daytime resting spots.

Another response the researchers found in many animals was anxiety. “We have a lot of experience in assessing anxiety in animals, especially zoo animals, because we are always trying to reduce anxiety,” Hartstone-Rose said. say. “So we are very cognizant of behaviors that may indicate anxiety.”

These responses include pacing, huddled, and increased vocalization. “Giraffes generally only run when they need to run for their lives, but during the eclipse, some giraffes started running like the sky was falling,” Hartstone-Rose said. “Several animals showed such reactions.” For example, baboons were seen running around together in groups.

Solar eclipse in 2024

On April 8th, a total solar eclipse will pass over Mexico, the United States, and Canada. Our special series covers everything you need to know, from how and when to see a solar eclipse to the strangest solar eclipse experience of all time.

Some Galapagos giant tortoises began mating during the eclipse and looked up to the sky after the eclipse passed. Previous research on hippos found that they also remain excited even after the peak of the eclipse.

However, it is difficult to determine which animal behavior is caused by the eclipse itself, and which animal behavior is a reaction to the crowds drawn by the eclipse. This is especially true in zoos where animals and humans are in close contact. For the same reason, it is difficult to draw conclusions about changes in pet behavior during an eclipse.

Hartstone-Rose and her colleagues conducted another survey at the zoo during the total solar eclipse on April 8, observing some of the same species to see if their behavior matched, as well as identifying new species. We plan to collect data on they again, participatory science project Through this, anyone can report animal observations during the eclipse. By exploring the patterns of animal behavior during unusual events like solar eclipses, we may be able to understand animal thought processes more generally.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Is spam email effective for receiving responses?

Posted on by
Reply

DDo spam emails actually work? We're not talking about suspicious phishing emails, we're talking about annoying ads and sales pitches. Perhaps the answer is yes, otherwise spammers wouldn't care, but I find it hard to believe.
Ali Farhan, Manchester

Please send new questions to
nq@theguardian.com
.

Reader replies

wait a minute. I'm going to email 300 million people and ask them. el comentario

It's more effective than doing nothing. This is the secret behind all marketing. one, another name

There are many different types of spam. More targeted types (e.g., an email from a company you've previously shopped with telling you they have a sale) can tell people what they might be interested in and potentially lead to a sale. That's why it works so well. Anything that's completely fake or untargeted won't be very effective.

But the reason companies use this kind of email is because it's so cheap. Send thousands of emails for just a few pounds. It only takes a few people to respond to make it worthwhile. For many of them, if 1 out of 1,000 people who receive an email buys something, they can make a profit from it. Meanwhile, everyone's inboxes suffer.
Snowy John

I work in sales and send out so-called spam emails. (This is in the business-to-business sales space.) There's a trick behind this. I don't reach out unless I have a reason and think there's something I can do to help. This is done by looking at the role the company is in, the types of technology, and evaluating its growth. Emails are personalized. Mixed in with my phone calls, I also embed videos of me reviewing websites in my emails.

It definitely works. Will everyone react? Absolutely not. Some people show interest, but it takes time to strike up a conversation. But that's part of sending an email. To get people in and out. If you choose not to contact us anymore, please do not contact us again.
Konobu 2020

I really don't understand people who don't care about spam or sell things on the street. I ignore everyone and look it up myself if I need to buy something. I may be missing out on countless deals, but I'll take a chance. Babylonian SheDevil03

My inbox is mostly unusable due to emails from companies I love and have previously purchased from. I receive at least two emails a month from companies that sell belts. How many quality belts can I buy? I might buy another one in five years, but I won't buy it from that annoying spammer. mega road

Last week's N&Q was about beans, this week it's about Spam. Will it be mushrooms next Sunday? Fried onion rings? Please wait and see… eddie miscellaneous post

I especially despise people who have an “unsubscribe” button that doesn't actually work. They immediately rank at the top of my banned list. Oz Josh

Avoiding spam is a great way to waste time. bricklayer options

Source: www.theguardian.com

Scientists are using flawed strategies to predict species responses to climate change, posing a dangerous risk of misinformation.

Posted on by
Reply

A new study reveals that a spatiotemporal substitution method used to predict species responses to climate change inaccurately predicts the effects of warming on ponderosa pines. This finding suggests that this method may be unreliable in predicting species’ future responses to changes in climate. Credit: SciTechDaily.com

A new study involving researchers at the University of Arizona suggests that changes are happening faster than trees can adapt. The discovery is a “warning to ecologists” studying climate change.

As the world warms and the climate changes, life will migrate, adapt, or become extinct. For decades, scientists have introduced certain methods to predict how things will happen. seed We will survive this era of great change. But new research suggests that method may be misleading or producing false results.

Flaws in prediction methods revealed

Researchers at the University of Arizona and team members from the U.S. Forest Service and Brown University found that this method (commonly referred to as spatiotemporal replacement) shows how a tree called the ponderosa pine, which is widespread in the western United States, grows. I discovered something that I couldn’t predict accurately. We have actually responded to global warming over the past few decades. This also means that other studies that rely on displacement in space and time may not accurately reflect how species will respond to climate change in coming decades.

The research team collected and measured growth rings of ponderosa pine trees from across the western United States, dating back to 1900, to determine how trees actually grow and how models predict how trees will respond to warming. We compared.

A view of ponderosa and Jeffrey pine forests from Verdi Mountain near Truckee, California.Credit: Daniel Perrette

“We found that substituting time for space produces incorrect predictions in terms of whether the response to warming will be positive or negative,” said study co-author Margaret Evans, an associate professor at the University of Arizona. ” he said. Tree ring laboratory. “With this method, ponderosa pines are supposed to benefit from warming, but they actually suffer from warming. This is dangerously misleading.”

Their research results were published on December 18th. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Daniel Perrette, a U.S. Forest Service ORISE fellow, is the lead author and received training in tree-ring analysis through the university’s summer field methods course at the University of Arizona Research Institute. The study was part of his doctoral dissertation at Brown University, and was conducted with Dov Sachs, professor of biogeography and biodiversity and co-author of the paper.

Inaccuracies in space and time substitutions

This is how space and time permutation works. All species occupy a range of favorable climatic conditions. Scientists believe that individuals growing at the hottest end of their range could serve as an example of what will happen to populations in cooler locations in a warmer future.

The research team found that ponderosa pine trees grow at a faster rate in warmer locations. Therefore, under the spatial and temporal displacement paradigm, this suggests that the situation should improve as the climate warms at the cold end of the distribution.

“But the tree-ring data doesn’t show that,” Evans said.

However, when the researchers used tree rings to assess how individual trees responded to changes in temperature, they found that ponderosa was consistently negatively affected by temperature fluctuations.

“If it’s a warmer-than-average year, they’re going to have smaller-than-average growth rings, so warming is actually bad for them, and that’s true everywhere,” she says.

The researchers believe this may be happening because trees are unable to adapt quickly enough to a rapidly changing climate.

An individual tree and all its growth rings are a record of that particular tree’s genetics exposed to different climatic conditions from one year to the next, Evans said. But how a species responds as a whole is the result of a slow pace of evolutionary adaptation to the average conditions in a particular location that are different from those elsewhere. Similar to evolution, the movement of trees that are better adapted to changing temperatures could save species, but climate change is happening too quickly, Evans said.

Rainfall effects and final thoughts

Beyond temperature, the researchers also looked at how trees responded to rainfall. They confirmed that, even across time and space, more water is better.

“These spatially-based predictions are really dangerous because spatial patterns reflect the end point after a long period in which species have had the opportunity to evolve, disperse, and ultimately sort themselves across the landscape. Because we do,” Evans said. “But that’s not how climate change works. Unfortunately, trees are in a situation where they are changing faster than they can adapt and are actually at risk of extinction. This is a warning to ecologists. .”

References: “Species responses to spatial climate change do not predict responses to climate change,” by Daniel L. Perrett, Margaret EK Evans, and Dov F. Sachs, December 18, 2023. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2304404120

Funding: Brown University Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology, Brown Institute for the Environment and Society, American Philosophical Society Lewis and Clark Expeditionary and Field Research Fund, Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, Department of Energy Oak Ridge Science Institute Education , NSF Macrosystems Biology

Source: scitechdaily.com