New York Times breaks PNAS wine-climate change study embargo
The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) has lifted the embargo early on a paper on the effects of grape growing on biodiversity after a New York Times story went live hours before the scheduled embargo.
Here’s a note that went out to the journal’s media list earlier today:
Due to an embargo break, PNAS is lifting the embargo early on the following paper. All other articles are under the scheduled embargo:
- Effect of wine grape production on biodiversity hotspots
The demand for wine on a warming Earth might have an impact on sensitive biodiversity hotspots, a study finds. To assess the ecological impacts of looming shifts in agriculture, Lee Hannah and colleagues examined how projected climate change might affect wine grape production, an industry sensitive to climate and concentrated in Mediterranean biodiversity hotspots. According to the authors, projected temperature increases will likely shrink the area of currently suitable wine producing regions by 20%-70% in the year 2050, while a growing and increasingly affluent global population will boost demand. To sustain wine production, the authors contend, growers will need to expand and adopt novel farming practices that are likely to impinge on undisturbed high biodiversity areas and use limited water resources. For example, establishing vineyards at high elevations with low temperatures might adversely affect upland ecosystems, and increased irrigation and misting used to cool grapes might deplete limited freshwater supplies. The study suggests that agricultural adaptation and conservation efforts will be needed to offset the indirect effects of climate change such as shifts in human land use, according to the authors.
Article #12-10127: “Climate change, wine, and conservation,” by Lee Hannah et al.
The story appears in today’s paper, which means it went online sometime last night. The study was originally embargoed for 3 p.m. Eastern today.
PNAS tells Embargo Watch that they heard about the Times story from a competitor, and have asked the paper for an explanation.