TY - JOUR
T1 - Measurement of microclimates in a warming world
T2 - problems and solutions
AU - Mitchell, Duncan
AU - Maloney, Shane K.
AU - Snelling, Edward P.
AU - Carvalho Fonsêca, Vinícius de França
AU - Fuller, Andrea
PY - 2024/7
Y1 - 2024/7
N2 - As the world warms, it will be tempting to relate the biological responses of terrestrial animals to air temperature. But air temperature typically plays a lesser role in the heat exchange of those animals than does radiant heat. Under radiant load, animals can gain heat even when body surface temperature exceeds air temperature. However, animals can buffer the impacts of radiant heat exposure: burrows and other refuges may block solar radiant heat fully, but trees and agricultural shelters provide only partial relief. For animals that can do so effectively, evaporative cooling will be used to dissipate body heat. Evaporative cooling is dependent directly on the water vapour pressure difference between the body surface and immediate surroundings, but only indirectly on relative humidity. High relative humidity at high air temperature implies a high water vapour pressure, but evaporation into air with 100% relative humidity is not impossible. Evaporation is enhanced by wind, but the wind speed reported by meteorological services is not that experienced by animals; instead, the wind, air temperature, humidity and radiation experienced is that of the animal's microclimate. In this Commentary, we discuss how microclimate should be quantified to ensure accurate assessment of an animal's thermal environment. We propose that the microclimate metric of dry heat load to which the biological responses of animals should be related is black-globe temperature measured on or near the animal, and not air temperature. Finally, when analysing those responses, the metric of humidity should be water vapour pressure, not relative humidity.
AB - As the world warms, it will be tempting to relate the biological responses of terrestrial animals to air temperature. But air temperature typically plays a lesser role in the heat exchange of those animals than does radiant heat. Under radiant load, animals can gain heat even when body surface temperature exceeds air temperature. However, animals can buffer the impacts of radiant heat exposure: burrows and other refuges may block solar radiant heat fully, but trees and agricultural shelters provide only partial relief. For animals that can do so effectively, evaporative cooling will be used to dissipate body heat. Evaporative cooling is dependent directly on the water vapour pressure difference between the body surface and immediate surroundings, but only indirectly on relative humidity. High relative humidity at high air temperature implies a high water vapour pressure, but evaporation into air with 100% relative humidity is not impossible. Evaporation is enhanced by wind, but the wind speed reported by meteorological services is not that experienced by animals; instead, the wind, air temperature, humidity and radiation experienced is that of the animal's microclimate. In this Commentary, we discuss how microclimate should be quantified to ensure accurate assessment of an animal's thermal environment. We propose that the microclimate metric of dry heat load to which the biological responses of animals should be related is black-globe temperature measured on or near the animal, and not air temperature. Finally, when analysing those responses, the metric of humidity should be water vapour pressure, not relative humidity.
KW - Climate change
KW - Globe temperature
KW - Humidity
KW - Shade
KW - Wind speed
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85197724221&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1242/jeb.246481
DO - 10.1242/jeb.246481
M3 - Review article
C2 - 38958209
AN - SCOPUS:85197724221
SN - 0022-0949
VL - 227
JO - The Journal of Experimental Biology
JF - The Journal of Experimental Biology
IS - 13
M1 - jeb246481
ER -