Table 1.
Summary of the notation used for variables and equations.
Table 2.
List of general circulation models (GCMs) used in this study and their associated modeling centers.
Figure 1.
Map showing estuarine locations from which observed temperature records were used and for which projections were made for winter estuarine water temperatures.
Color-coding for sites is based on latitude (red more southern, blue more northern). Full list of sites is provided in [39] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2012.08.012.
Figure 2.
Relations between winter water temperature and air temperature in 12 estuaries along the east coast of the United States.
Points represent winter temperatures in a given year in a given estuary. Estuarine water temperatures are expressed as (A) cumulative degree days <17°C and (B) minimum daily winter temperature (Dec-Mar). Air temperature is expressed as minimum monthly mean winter temperature. Gray line represents the least squares regression fit based on eq. 3. Color of the symbol represents the latitude of the source estuary for the water temperature data (see Figure 1).
Figure 3.
Projections of winter temperature metrics at four estuaries along the east coast of the United States (metrics: minimum mean monthly winter air temperature, cumulative degree days <17°C, and minimum daily estuarine water temperature).
Gray line represents observations, orange line represents projections under the commit scenario (350 ppm CO2 by 2100), blue line represents projections under the B1 scenario (550 ppm CO2 by 2100), and the green line represents projections under the A1B scenario (720 ppm CO2 by 2100). A 40 year LOWESS filter (tension = 0.25) of the mean annual projections from 14 general circulation models is displayed (see Table 1). Shading represents standard error around mean. Observed and projected thermal tolerance metrics were blended over the period 2001 to 2010; the blended value in 2005 is 0.5 * observed +0.5 * projected.
Figure 4.
Estimated latitude of thermal tolerance metrics in 2080–2100 under three climate change emission scenarios.
The gray line and shading represent the thermal tolerance metric and 95% confidence intervals for gray snapper juveniles as determined from an experimental study [39].
Figure 5.
Estimated latitude of thermal tolerance metrics under the A1B emission scenario at three time periods.
The gray line and shading represent the thermal tolerance metric and 95% confidence intervals for gray snapper juveniles as determined from an experimental study [39].
Figure 6.
Estimated northern range limit of gray snapper during three time periods and under three emission scenarios.
The heavy and light gray lines represent the estimate of current northern range limit and standard error as determined from field observations [39].
Figure 7.
Estimated northern range limit of gray snapper during two time periods and under three emission scenarios.
Results for each of the 14 GCMs are provided to present the range of projections that compose the ensemble. The heavy and light gray lines represent the estimate of current northern range limit and standard error as determined from field observations [39].
Table 3.
Percent variance in estimate of gray snapper northern range attributable to different factors.
Figure 8.
Change in projected cumulative degree days <17°C (dark line) and change in minimum daily temperature (gray line) by latitude under the A1B scenario comparing 1980–2000 and 2080–2100.