The following free argumentative essay example is to use as an example only!
Introduction
The Arctic is currently experiencing an arctic warming event. The region has been warming at a rate of about 0.5-1.5C per decade for the past 40 years (Florko et al., 2021). The Arctic Ocean’s ice is predicted to melt during the coming decades, and the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets will raise sea levels. These changes may have far-reaching effects on this region's ecosystems, human society, agriculture and other infrastructure. Numerous species are already battling these changes, such as seals, polar bears, and whales, who face a threat of habitat loss as a result of melting ice and increasing temperatures that are outpacing their capacity to adapt (VanWormer et al., 2019). Climate change is also affecting populations of other Arctic vertebrates, including bearded seals (Erignathus barbatus), snow geese (Chen rossii), narwhals (Monodon monoceros), and lemmings (Lemmus trimucronatus), among others (Hamilton et al., 2019). The current review examines the climatic change effects on arctic mammals.
Evaluation and Synthesis of the Review
The article by Descamps et al. (2017) is about climate change's impacts on the Svalbard Archipelago wildlife in Norway. The researchers looked at how climate change will affect the animals and plants living there and how they will adapt to it. They also looked at how human activity in this area would affect the animals and plants there. The assessment has shown that humans can impact change in ecosystems by introducing new species or increasing the number of existing ones already living there.
Descamps et al. (2017) also discuss how this area can serve as a case study for understanding other areas with similar environmental conditions. The authors point out that few studies analyze climate change impacts on wildlife in Svalbard (Descamps et al., 2017). This situation may be due to several reasons, including the limited availability of data and information about the local environment, lack of funding for research, and insufficient knowledge in this area. The authors also note that there are scanty studies that analyze the climate change impacts on animal species in Svalbard. They argue that this situation may be due to several reasons, including the limited availability of data and information about local environments, lack of funding for research, and insufficient knowledge about the effects of climate change on animal species in Svalbard. They conclude by suggesting several ways scientists can collect data and information needed to understand how animals respond to changes in temperature and precipitation.
In the review, Descamps et al. (2017) use an approach called "theory-based case studies", which was developed to address these issues. In this method, they use theory as a foundation for their analysis and then apply it to actual data. They use three main theories: evolutionary theory, population biology and community ecology, and theoretical models such as Lotka's equation and MacArthur's theory of island biogeography. The results show that there has been a significant decline in Arctic foxes (Vulpes lagopus) due to warming temperatures since 1980. Foxes have adapted by moving into higher latitudes, but more may be needed if temperatures continue to rise due to global warming. Arctic wolves (Canis lupus) are also declining due to warming temperatures, which could be offset by expanding their range northward.
Descamps et al. (2017) study is a well-designed systematic review with high-quality evidence. The authors used an appropriate search strategy and included relevant studies in the review. Further, the study presents a unique perspective on climate change and its impacts on wildlife in Svalbard. It also identifies the context that surrounds this study. They also discuss how this study was conducted, and the information gathered to support their conclusions. The authors also discuss their conceptual framework for understanding how climate change might impact wildlife in Svalbard. They present an argument that three main factors affect the sustainability of animal populations, such as habitat availability (i.e., temperature), food availability (i.e., seasonal changes in sea ice extent), and population size (i.e., population density).
However, some research gaps are evidenced from the review. The methodological gap was that the authors did not consider the effects of sampling errors (Descamps et al. (2017). Nonetheless, they used a weighting approach that reduced these errors. Consequently, this may have been an important source of bias in the results. The conceptual gap is that the authors did not consider some factors that could affect the results, such as differences between species, population density, and sex. The contextual gap is inadequate data on how climate change affects biodiversity in Svalbard or Norway, which could have influenced their findings.
Laidre et al. (2008) article is an example of an ecological study that has been conducted using a combination of different methods. The study used a combination of field and laboratory studies to measure the arctic mammals’ sensitivity to climate change impacts and their effects on their behavior and habitat use. It presents the results from a series of experiments in which the authors manipulated different conditions for each species, such as temperature and food supply, which allowed them to isolate specific variables and test their responses. The assessment also included several statistical methods, including correlation analysis and regression models. It discusses how they used these data sets to develop an equation model that can be used to estimate the future potential changes in sea ice cover around Alaska's North Slope due to climate warming trends over 20 years (2030–2049). The analysis also includes several comments on how they came up with their conclusions based on their findings.
The authors used their data to examine how the physical environment affects these animals' movements and behavior (Laidre et al., 2008). However, the assessment has several limitations which need to be addressed before it can be considered scientifically sound, such as the sample size needing to be bigger and more data being collected at each location. Further, there were limited air temperature measurements and a lack of measurements of whale vocalizations or other behavioral responses.
The use of a control group is a common practice in ecological research. It allows for comparing one variable with another and provides an opportunity to detect relationships between variables (Florko et al., 2021). Similarly, Hamilton et al. (2019) opine that a control group is crucial because it enables scientists to confirm that their findings are not the result of chance. As VanWormer et al. (2019) suggest, its use is essential because it enables scientists to check for behavioral changes that might be linked to climate change. However, Laidre et al. (2008) study only used two groups and did not include any other variables such as year or location. In addition, the authors should have specified how many individuals were used in the experiment or what type of data was collected during each stage. This lack of information makes it difficult for readers to evaluate the quality of this study based on what was provided in this article alone.
The study by Moore and Huntington (2008) is a valuable contribution to the literature on Arctic marine mammals and climate change because it objectively evaluates the quality of available literature on this topic. The authors carefully evaluate the existing evidence, including the results of several studies that were not published in peer-reviewed journals. The analysis has a good structure and also has a clear purpose. The authors clearly outline their objectives at the beginning of their paper. They state that they use Arctic marine mammals as a model to aid the analysis. Their objectives are to examine the climate change impact on populations, ecosystems, and habitats. The other objective is to identify critical factors affecting resilience. The authors also use a qualitative approach in order to study their topic. They use case studies to illustrate how temperature changes affect marine mammals differently. They present results from studies showing differences between species in terms of how they respond to temperature changes, even though they all have similar body temperatures. It shows that while some species will adapt well to changes in climate, others may not be able to survive these changes at all or may adapt only temporarily before becoming extinct due to lack of food or habitat change.
However, the first gap of this study is the need for a theoretical framework or framework to understand how humans affect their environment. As Florko et al. (2021) highlighted, this gap affects the analysis of the study because it is difficult to understand how humans affect their environment when there is no theoretical model or framework to understand how humans affect their environment. It may also affect the quality and strength of this study because it may lead scientists to make wrong conclusions about climate change. Another gap in this article is that controls are not used for comparison purposes. Controls are used for comparison purposes so scientists can compare two similar things or events. Without controls, there will be no way for scientists to compare two similar things or events, such as if one thing changed, then another would also change due to a correlation between two different things. However, without controls, scientists cannot make direct comparisons between them because they have no idea what will happen if one thing changes.
Conclusion
Climate change has been a major topic in the news recently. One of the topics being discussed is how climate change may affect arctic mammals such as polar bears, seals, and whales. The Arctic is a freezing environment, and arctic mammals have adapted to live there. For example, polar bears are considered top predators in their ecosystem, which means they eat other species that are smaller than them (e.g., seals). However, if more food is needed to support all of these animals, some will be forced to migrate or die entirely.
References
Descamps, S., Aars, J., Fuglei, E., Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Pavlova, O., ... & Strøm, H. (2017). Climate change impacts on wildlife in a High Arctic archipelago–Svalbard, Norway. Global Change Biology, 23(2), 490-502.
Florko, K. R., Tai, T. C., Cheung, W. W., Ferguson, S. H., Sumaila, U. R., Yurkowski, D. J., & Auger‐Méthé, M. (2021). Predicting how climate change threatens the prey base of Arctic marine predators. Ecology Letters, 24(12), 2563-2575.
Hamilton, C. D., Vacquié-Garcia, J., Kovacs, K. M., Ims, R. A., Kohler, J., & Lydersen, C. (2019). Contrasting changes in space use induced by climate change in two Arctic marine mammal species. Biology Letters, 15(3), 20180834.
Laidre, K. L., Stirling, I., Lowry, L. F., Wiig, Ø., Heide-Jørgensen, M. P., & Ferguson, S. H. (2008). Quantifying the sensitivity of Arctic marine mammals to climate‐induced habitat change. Ecological Applications, 18(sp2), S97-S125.
Moore, S. E., & Huntington, H. P. (2008). Arctic marine mammals and climate change: Impacts and resilience. Ecological Applications, 18(sp2), S157-S165.
VanWormer, E., Mazet, J. A. K., Hall, A., Gill, V. A., Boveng, P. L., London, J. M., ... & Goldstein, T. (2019). Viral emergence in marine mammals in the North Pacific may be linked to Arctic sea ice reduction. Scientific reports, 9(1), 1-11.
