Does the planet really survive the sixth mass extinction?

According to the latest research, the sixth mass extinction that our planet had to face these days, leads to the destruction of wildlife. It was found that the rate of decline in the numbers of plants and animals around the world is now much greater than the early predictions of scientists. Moreover, an attempt to save species from extinction will not help wildlife in the long term.

What is the loss of wildlife?

The researchers found that about two species of vertebrates die each year. It may seem that these figures are not so dramatic, but it should be understood that these rates of extinction are 10-100 times higher than natural ones.

In addition, scientists note how this rate of extinction of wild animals may indicate a more disturbing trend. It is possible that individual populations are disappearing because their ranges narrow and divide, and this can be just as devastating for the planet as a whole.

Research of scientists

Studying the habitat of 26,700 different terrestrial vertebrates (including about half of all known birds, mammals, amphibians and reptiles), scientists found that more than 30 percent lost a significant portion of their population and habitat. They then analyzed in more detail the populations of 177 mammals. It turned out that although all animals lost more than 30 percent of their habitats, 40 percent of mammals lost up to 80 percent of their populations.

"Mass extinction was seen as a loss of species," explains Paul Ehrlich, co-author of the study, the results of which were published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. - But the loss of the populations composing these species is no less important (or even more important). It is worth saying why we care about these populations. For example, the disappearance of a population of birds, bats and insects that control pests will lead to loss of income in agriculture. "

Destruction of populations

Therefore, although some species can be preserved, researchers warn that this will not change the situation if vital populations disappear. For example, even if a small honey bee population persists in Mexico (that is, it will still exist as a species), the agricultural industry in the United States will still be destroyed, as it will lose one of the most important pollinators.

"Therefore, it is important to recognize that while the extinction of species is negative and largely irreversible, the loss of the population and its population has a more destructive effect," Erlich continues.

The loss of populations that are links in one food chain is really bad news, as the planet's health is suffering. Many components of the ecosystem are slowly disappearing, resulting in wetlands no longer able to purify water, and the survival of forests that prevent floods is threatened. The disappearance of populations is also a harbinger of the extinction of species, and therefore more attention should be paid to how the numbers of animals change in them.