Global warming-fuelled heat and drought is already hitting yields of maize, wheat and soybeans to the tune of $20 billion a year, a study has estimated. This could rise eightfold, to more than $160 billion by 2100, unless we slash emissions.

While the financial losses will be greatest for big producers such as the US, the impacts will be felt most in the lowest-income countries, where ,��������� at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in Austria. “If you look at the least-developed countries in Africa, the impact is much bigger.” This could lead to social unrest and increased migration, she warns.

There is great uncertainty about these kinds of projections, not least because so much depends on how farmers respond and adapt to a continually changing climate, for instance, by switching to different crops or adopting irrigation where it is possible. In fact, the whole point of this study is to raise awareness and encourage adaptation, to help ensure these projections turn out to be overestimates, says team member , also at IIASA. “This is the entire mission of climate scientists: we make these cases for people to react, so our projections turn out to be wrong.”

The researchers started by gathering data on the yields per country of maize, wheat and soya from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Next, they took past climate data and calculated the drought level, using a standard approach that estimates soil moisture levels from rainfall and evaporation levels.

Past heat extremes and drought levels were then compared with the yields from 1974 to 2004 to estimate the impact of heat and drought. They then used these statistical correlations to estimate crop losses from 2007 to 2019. Their results suggest that increases in heat extremes and drought have caused a 3.5 per cent decline in yields relative to the 1974 to 2004 baseline. “Three per cent or so might not sound like much, but this is a major impact [on] the global food market, which regionally can trigger a severe crisis,” says Kornhuber.

The researchers then calculated the economic losses, based on FAO data showing how much farmers would have been paid for their produce at the time. Finally, they used the same approach to project future losses in several different emissions scenarios, assuming that some adaptation takes place.

Free newsletter

Sign up to The Earth Edition

Sign up to newsletter

In a high-emissions scenario, known as SSP3-7.0, global yields will fall by around 35 per cent by 2100, with annual losses rising to more than $161 billion. “The production losses caused by heat and drought are around 855 million tonnes a year,” says Hwong, who presented the results at a meeting of the European Geosciences Union in Vienna in May. “I think that is equivalent to what around 2 billion people consume over a year.”

This could be an underestimate of the full impact of climate change for a number of reasons: it’s just three crops, and it doesn’t include flood, storm or rain damage, or the possibility that shortages could lead to big price increases, as is already happening with some other crops such as coffee and cacao.

A key solution to climate change isn’t happening – and that’s good

Removing CO2 from the atmosphere by capturing the carbon from burning biomass is supposed to save the planet, but it looks like the flagship project will never happen

at Columbia University in New York says the study’s reliance on the statistical relationships between yield losses and extreme heat and drought could result in it overestimating the impacts by 2100. “Statistical yield models are great for explaining what’s happening now, and in the near past [or] future, but they are inherently unreliable when pushed into vastly different environmental regimes, such as high-emission climate scenarios by the end of the century.” Computer models of how plants are affected by rising CO2 and temperatures are better for projecting what will happen by the end of the century, he says.

at the University of Queensland, Australia, makes the same point. “Although models are not perfect, they are better suited for this type of extrapolation.” However, her team recently released a , which hasn’t been peer-reviewed, showing that two widely used models for wheat make large errors and are especially poor at forecasting the combined effects of extreme heat and drought.

But Kornhuber has defended his team’s use of statistical methods. “The models are remarkable tools, but some of the validation papers have suggested that they might not be super responsive to extremes,” he says. “In our project, extremes were the main focus, so we decided to establish these relationships directly through statistics.”

Albert Einstein’s theory of special relativity can reshape chemical bonds within molecules, and researchers have just seen it happen for the first time.

The theory of special relativity describes how moving at speeds close to the speed of light would affect travellers’ experience of space and time. Because of this, it is usually associated with particle accelerators and spacefaring objects, but within some heavy atoms, electrons experience relativistic speeds too.

at Brown University in Rhode Island and his colleagues have now managed to take an unprecedented look at how this breaks the standard notion of chemical bonds within a charged molecule made from bismuth and carbon.

Within the molecule, a bismuth atom and a carbon atom were connected by three bonds, one of which the researchers expected to be of “sigma” type and two of “pi” type. The difference between these two types stems from electrons’ quantum character – each electron is “smeared” across some region of space, instead of being a tight ball, and whether these regions overlap head on or side by side determines the type of chemical bond they create between the atoms.

In their experiment, Wang and his colleagues mapped the distribution of electrons throughout the molecule, effectively getting a look at its bonds. But instead of seeing electrons distributed in shapes associated with sigma and pi bonds, the team noticed that two of the bonds resembled two different mixes of sigma and pi shapes. “Their characters are different from our normal understanding,” says Wang. “You can’t really call it the sigma and pi.”

His team turned to at Washington State University, whose calculations ultimately showed that this mixing was a consequence of electrons near the bismuth nucleus feeling such a strong electromagnetic interaction that they moved at relativistic speeds. He says this effect hadn’t previously been captured in an experiment.

Subscriber-only newsletter

Sign up to Lost in Space-Time

Sign up to newsletter

“The hardest thing about [studying] heavy elements is a lack of really good experimental data,” says Peterson. “To have such a beautiful experiment to be able to essentially compare very high-level theory to data is really a luxury.”

Wang says one important part of the new experiment is that he and his colleagues could make the molecule very cold before looking at its electrons. This dampened any jitters and excitations that would have made the final images imprecise.

“As you go down to the bottom of the periodic table, the usual quantum mechanics is no longer sufficient, you need to take into account the effects of relativity,” says at the University of Toulouse in France. He says that all elements in the same row of the periodic table as bismuth are affected by relativistic effects – for instance, gold would be the same colour as silver and mercury would not be liquid without them.

at the University of Helsinki in Finland says that for bismuth, the relativistic effect on its bonding with carbon could influence how organic bismuth compounds are used in chemical reactions. In fact, by researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Coal Research in Germany has already shown that relativistic effects help make this heavy metal a good catalyst, or accelerator, of chemical processes.

Wang says that the team now wants to repeat their experiment but swap bismuth for elements close to it in the periodic table to see when exactly special relativity makes the traditional chemical bond structure collapse.

A 555-million-year-old worm had a predilection for turning right, possibly indicating the oldest known example of handedness.

Although these worms lacked limbs and so couldn’t be considered left- or right-handed in the way that we understand, the development of a tendency to favour one side over another is evidence of an advanced nervous system.

It remains a feature of free-living mobile life today, but until this discovery, it wasn’t thought to have emerged until the Cambrian Period, which began around 541 million years ago.

at the American Museum of Natural History in New York and his colleagues analysed 100 fossil specimens of a small flatworm-like creature, Spriggina floundersi, collected in South Australia over recent decades.

These animals lived during the Ediacaran Period, when multicellular life first became widespread. It preceded the Cambrian explosion, when animal life diversified dramatically and many groups of animals first appeared.

Spriggina lived in what was, half a billion years ago, a shallow ocean and is thought to have foraged on or close to the seafloor, moving by wriggling to the left or right.

Free newsletter

Sign up to The Earth Edition

Sign up to newsletter

“We have around 50 specimens of Spriggina that are clearly bent,” says Evans. Twice as many of the fossilised worms are bent to the left than to the right, he says. This means the creature itself bent to the right, as the specimens are mirror-image impressions of the animals, made when storms buried them in sand.

“This appears to be statistically significant and matches what biologists find when they study handedness in different animals today,” says Evans. “Some specimens have multiple bends to both the right and left, suggesting that they all could bend both ways, which makes sense if you don’t want to be stuck moving in a circle.”

While the majority seem to demonstrate right-handedness, it is hard to tell if any were left-handed, he says. “I imagine it’s like taking a picture of 100 people waving with one hand today. You would likely be able to count that more people are waving with their right hand, but you wouldn’t be able to tell who is right- or left-handed.”

Discoveries like this demonstrate that many foundational characteristics that are common to a variety of animals today, such as the ability to move around, bilateral symmetry and handedness, evolved in the Ediacaran, says Evans.

In the Cambrian, organisms built on that foundation to become more complex, for example adding legs to move more efficiently, becoming “less alien and more like the major groups of animals we know today”, says Evans. “This is cool because it suggests that, while the Cambrian was an amazing time in animal evolution, those organisms didn’t just come out of nowhere: they built on the foundations established in the Ediacaran.”

“The presence of handedness in any kind of functional asymmetry, really deep into the fossil record, gives us important and interesting information about how these behaviours have evolved and how deeply in time they emerged,” says at Flinders University in Adelaide, Australia.