As Earth got hotter, early mammals responded by getting smaller

Mammalian 'dwarfing' makes for more efficient heating, and has been documented after 'hyperthermal' events 56 and 54 million years ago. Could climate change make that happen again?

Courtesy of Grace Delgado
Abigail D’Ambrosia, a UNH doctoral student, shows the size difference of two Arenahippus specimens: larger fossils from non-ETM2 on the right, smaller mid-ETM2 Arenahippus specimen on the left hand.

Some 56 million years ago, things were looking up for our evolutionary forebears. The dinosaurs had been gone for more than 10 million years, allowing early mammals to thrive.

But then came a challenge: methane, a greenhouse gas whose climate impact is 25 times more potent than CO2's, bubbled up from the ocean floor, causing global temperatures to rise 5 to 8 degrees C over a 10,000-year span, and stayed high for almost 200,000 years. Another such warming event, known as a “hyperthermal,” followed two million years later, causing a temperature rise with about half the magnitude of the first.

A study published in Science Advances on Wednesday focuses on how mammals adapted to these shocks, and how they could do so again in an era of human-caused climate change: by shrinking.

It is more efficient to cool off if you have a small body size because you have a larger surface-area-to-volume ratio,” the study’s lead author, Abigail D’Ambrosia, told The Los Angeles Times.

Scientists have long observed that birds and mammals in colder regions have more bulk than their counterparts in warmer regions, a relationship known as Bergmann’s Rule. Mammal fossils showed this phenomenon in action, with “dwarfing” taking place after the first hyperthermal 56 million years ago.

Ms. D’Ambrosia, a PhD student at the University of New Hampshire, investigated how mammals had responded to the second, smaller “hyperthermal” 54 million years ago. She and her colleagues ventured into the Bighorn Basin, a fossil-rich patch of northwest Wyoming, searching for the teeth of mammals alive during that time: a proxy for body size. By focusing on tooth sizes, previous researchers had found that an ancestor of today’s horses had shrunk by about 30 percent, then partially rebounded, after the first warming event.

The authors of this study focused on how another “early equid,” Arenahippus pernix, as well as a rabbit-sized ancestor of pigs and deer, small herbivores, and a lemur-like primate fared after the second warming event.

Arenahippus, the horse precursor, responded like its predecessors had during the previous warming, shrinking by an average body size of 14 percent – from about the size of a small dog to a cat. Diacodexis metsiacus, the deer-and-pig ancestor, also dropped in body size by about 14 percent.

But Cantius abditus, the primate, only shrank by about 4 percent, and Hyopsodus simplex, the weasel-like critter, actually grew almost 2 percent after the warming event. An explanation of why they bucked this trend will likely have to wait for more research. “It’s hard to say what is going on in detail without collecting more samples,” D’Ambrosia told the L.A. Times.

During our current warming, temperatures may not rise as much as they did 56 million to 54 million years ago. But our lifetimes will likely see noticeably warmer climates. The Paris Climate Agreements aim to limit global temperature rises to 2 degrees celsius by the end of this century.

"If we start to see patterns repeat themselves, we can learn from that," Jonathan Bloch, the curator of vertebrate paleontology at the Florida Museum of Natural History, told the Associated Press. "And what we learn from these lessons will certainly be important as we think about the possible response of plants and animals to future climate change."

This report includes material from the Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.