Humankind is revealed as simultaneously insignificant and utterly dominant in the grand scheme of life on Earth by a groundbreaking new assessment of all life on the planet.
The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study. Yet since the dawn of civilisation, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.
The new work is the first comprehensive estimate of the weight of every class of living creature and overturns some long-held assumptions. Bacteria are indeed a major life form – 13% of everything – but plants overshadow everything, representing 82% of all living matter. All other creatures, from insects to fungi, to fish and animals, make up just 5% of the world’s biomass.
Another surprise is that the teeming life revealed in the oceans by the recent BBC television series Blue Planet II turns out to represent just 1% of all biomass. The vast majority of life is land-based and a large chunk – an eighth – is bacteria buried deep below the surface.
“I was shocked to find there wasn’t already a comprehensive, holistic estimate of all the different components of biomass,” said Prof Ron Milo, at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel, who led the work, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
“I would hope this gives people a perspective on the very dominant role that humanity now plays on Earth,” he said, adding that he now chooses to eat less meat due to the huge environmental impact of livestock.
The transformation of the planet by human activity has led scientists to the brink of declaring a new geological era – the Anthropocene. One suggested marker for this change are the bones of the domestic chicken, now ubiquitous across the globe.
The new work reveals that farmed poultry today makes up 70% of all birds on the planet, with just 30% being wild. The picture is even more stark for mammals – 60% of all mammals on Earth are livestock, mostly cattle and pigs, 36% are human and just 4% are wild animals.
“It is pretty staggering,” said Milo. “In wildlife films, we see flocks of birds, of every kind, in vast amounts, and then when we did the analysis we found there are [far] more domesticated birds.”
The destruction of wild habitat for farming, logging and development has resulted in the start of what many scientists consider the sixth mass extinction of life to occur in the Earth’s four billion year history. About half the Earth’s animals are thought to have been lost in the last 50 years.
But comparison of the new estimates with those for the time before humans became farmers and the industrial revolution began reveal the full extent of the huge decline. Just one-sixth of wild mammals, from mice to elephants, remain, surprising even the scientists. In the oceans, three centuries of whaling has left just a fifth of marine mammals in the oceans.
“It is definitely striking, our disproportionate place on Earth,” said Milo. “When I do a puzzle with my daughters, there is usually an elephant next to a giraffe next to a rhino. But if I was trying to give them a more realistic sense of the world, it would be a cow next to a cow next to a cow and then a chicken.”
Despite humanity’s supremacy, in weight terms Homo sapiens is puny. Viruses alone have a combined weight three times that of humans, as do worms. Fish are 12 times greater than people and fungi 200 times as large.
But our impact on the natural world remains immense, said Milo, particularly in what we choose to eat: “Our dietary choices have a vast effect on the habitats of animals, plants and other organisms.”
“I would hope people would take this [work] as part of their world view of how they consume,” he said. ”I have not become vegetarian, but I do take the environmental impact into my decision making, so it helps me think, do I want to choose beef or poultry or use tofu instead?”
The researchers calculated the biomass estimates using data from hundreds of studies, which often used modern techniques, such as satellite remote sensing that can scan great areas, and gene sequencing that can unravel the myriad organisms in the microscopic world.
They started by assessing the biomass of a class of organisms and then they determined which environments such life could live in across the world to create a global total. They used carbon as the key measure and found all life contains 550bn tonnes of the element. The researchers acknowledge that substantial uncertainties remain in particular estimates, especially for bacteria deep underground, but say the work presents a useful overview.
Paul Falkowski, at Rutgers University in the US and not part of the research team, said: “The study is, to my knowledge, the first comprehensive analysis of the biomass distribution of all organisms – including viruses – on Earth.”
“There are two major takeaways from this paper,” he said. “First, humans are extremely efficient in exploiting natural resources. Humans have culled, and in some cases eradicated, wild mammals for food or pleasure in virtually all continents. Second, the biomass of terrestrial plants overwhelmingly dominates on a global scale – and most of that biomass is in the form of wood.”
As 2019 begins…
… we’re asking readers to make a new year contribution in support of The Guardian’s independent journalism. More people are reading and supporting our independent, investigative reporting than ever before. And unlike many news organisations, we have chosen an approach that allows us to keep our journalism open and accessible to all, regardless of where they live or what they can afford. But this is only possible thanks to voluntary support from our readers – something we have to maintain and build on for every year to come.
The Guardian is editorially independent, meaning we set our own agenda. Our journalism is free from commercial bias and not influenced by billionaire owners, politicians or shareholders. No one edits our editor. No one steers our opinion. This is important as it enables us to give a voice to those less heard, challenge the powerful and hold them to account. It’s what makes us different to so many others in the media, at a time when factual, honest reporting is critical.
Please make a new year contribution today to help us deliver the independent journalism the world needs for 2019 and beyond. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you.
View all comments >
comments (2285)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
Winning
As you drink plastic polluted water
Whoosh?
Ok Donald.
Thank you Damian and the Guardian.
This should be top priority for UN, EU and all other global organisations, yet for most of them annihilation of biodiversity is an afterthought, just like overpopulation and overconsumption.
We need to stop the slaying of trees, the production of ink chemicals, the energy use of printers and servers immediately!
We need to have a population of maybe 1-2 billion.
So how do we decide the 6 billion people we need to cull?
Overconsumption is the problem, not overpopulation.
Good old humans. Our savage nature is why the Neanderthals don't exist now. As for those who currently have some neanderthal in them, you are probably a descendant of a raped neanderthal. This time, we will continue to destroy the habitat of other species. It's human nature, nothing surprising really.
There's nothing like breaking it gently.
Yes we outcompeted them at a time when we definitely had not escaped natural selection.
Peak Guardian hand wringing
Fascinating and depressing in equal measure. We need to get a grip as a species.
Get a grip of using statistics....64% of the time, it works everytime
We can't because we are Apex predators. This is what Apex predators do.
If you don't believe me, you only have to look at how Ants completely dominate their environment, fight vicious wars between nests for resources, and hunt and remove all insects when they want more food.
True AI and any aliens we meet will be exactly the same as humans and ants.
In that spirit I've just poured some boiling water into an ants' nest. That's how apex I am. It's just an instinct which I can't control.
I wonder which species (if any are left) will evolve to pre-eminence after we're gone?
won't be pigs that's for sure
Trump and his offspring.
Better to die then - the afterlife (nothing? paradise?) can't be worst than a world full of trumps and trumpists - even the inferno.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein
I'm pretty sure that was Marilyn Monroe
Yes, there is doubt that the saying was from Einstein, maybe Voltaire, or someone else, someone unknown, but anyway it is a good saying.. so true.
But it was most definitely NOT Marilyn
Suddenly, Marilyn the 80s pop star springs to mind.
20% more, and we're done.
It's good to have goals.
Why stop there?
20% increase in human population or 20% further decline in animal species?
unless we find a way to stop the increase in human population, we are done
That quote from the original planet of the apes is rather apt I would argue.
"Beware the beast man, for he is the devil's pawn. Alone among god's primates, he kills for sport or lust or greed. Yea, he will murder his brother to possess his brother's land. Let him not breed in great numbers, for he will make a desert of his home and yours. Shun him; drive him back into his jungle lair, for he is the harbinger of death."
I hate every ape I see
From chimpan-a to chimpan-z,
No, you'll never make a monkey out of me.
Oh, my God, I was wrong,
It was Earth all along.
You finally made a monkey...
Ape:
Yes we finally made a monkey...
Troy and Apes:
Yes, you finally made a monkey out of me!
Troy:
I love you, Dr. Zaius!
And'sonce we're talking about man's hand in mass extinctions...
...some men hunt for sport,
Others hunt for food.
The only thing I'm hunting for
Is an outfit that looks good.
See my vest, see my vest,
Made from real gorilla chest.
Feel this sweater, there's no better
Than authentic Irish Setter.
See this hat, 'twas my cat.
My evening wear, vampire bat.
These white slippers are albino
African endangered rhino.
Grizzly bear underwear,
Turtle necks I've got my share.
Beret of poodle on my noodle it shall rest
Try my red robin suit,
It comes one breast or two...
See my vest, See my vest, See my vest.
Like my loafers, former gophers,
It was that or skin my chauffeurs,
But a greyhound fur tuxedo would be best...
So let's prepare these dogs,
Kill two for matching clogs!
See my vest!
See me vest!
Oh, please, won't you see my vest...
"Smethers pass me my Gorillas chest vest......"
We're like a plague of locusts.
and yet the debate about limiting human population gets little attention here
The locusts, cockroaches and Brexiteers will get along just fine.
'Man is a bad animal' (William Burroughs); perhaps that should be 'the' bad animal
So much news and opinion coverage revolves around how changes to trade arrangements might slightly impact economic growth.
Almost no news coverage of how that very same economic growth is relentlessly fucking the environment and the ecosystems that we depend on.
We need to shrink. Less manufacturing. Less industry. Less intensive agriculture and less agriculture overall. Fewer people. Yes it would be bad for "the economy". But the economy is not the real world.
Technology is shrinking our impact all the time.
Is that so?
Nope. A good example is our new found ability to mine underwater using ROVs. Now we can churn up the sea bed in our search for a few precious metals. Cause we can.
If God (or Nature if you an atheist) had wanted us to be vegans he would not have given us a digestive system that can digest meat and canine teeth.
‘Can’ being the operative word; it’s not compulsory!
What are your nipples for, Hermann? FFS, adapt.
Nature probably didn't foresee us exploiting the shit out of it. I wouldn't put too much truck in what nature "wants", nature will be fine after we have finished ourselves.
Overpopulation is the real problem in the world today - it causes or exacerbates pretty much all of the planets woes. This is the problem we need to address if we are to survive as a species and only a fool would deny it.
That’s our other problem. We are fools.
Overconsumption is the problem. A minority of people (the rich) use the vast majority of resources
Actually it isn't and we are likely to find out that a declining population is not without downsides quite soon.
This isnt really news this information has been available for years if not decades. Ive always liked this graphic link
The real problem is our consumption & economic system makes it almost impossible for consumers to navigate & make good eco friendly choices the simple fact is we have to consume less, that means no more GDP obsessions, engineering things to last a life time, growing food along permaculture principles NO MORE oil based/synthetic chemicals or materials NO MORE BURNING fossil fuels. A reduction in technology that relies on energy intensive gadgets.
In fact the only salvation for civilization will be the abolition of the monetary system to a truly egalitarian society based on deep ecological values! YEP that's never going to happen.
We most certainly have to stop looking back in history with pride, as if anything we have ever done to nature was beneficial to the natural world or our own species.
All makes perfect sense. But go and say it under one of the Business or Politics stories and you'll be called a luddite or a nimby or something.
We must end this supremacy of economic thought. The real world is more important than "the economy"
Yes the natural world is the real world, the only place you will find the truth of anything.
Inane headline. Why would you juxtapose a stat about "all life" with one about "wild mammals" as if there was some sort of meaningful comparison to be made?
"Inane headline." Add an 's' after the second letter.
Yay, go great apes!
Yep. We're evil.
Repulsive species are we.
Yes, feeling a personal guilt - and sharing it widely - for the actions of a minority.
It's too late to save the planet. In order to ensure I have some kind of a legacy I'm now being as environmentally destructive as possible, that way when the planet is uninhabitable and I look out over the destroyed landscape with my son I can turn to him and say 'I helped do this'.
Long may we reign! Until the dinosaurs come back
They never left - they turned into chickens.
The trees may still be winning overall but how long until we cut down all the forests and turn them into farms?
We won’t get that far. We are attempting to get all 7.6 billion people out of poverty and into a middle class life. This can’t physically happen.
Cows are the elephant in the room of global warming too. We need to reduce the global herd by 80% - that would leave all the dairy cattle, and they produce a small amount of meat too.
An apt metaphor, as it seems cows don't leave any room for elephants.
But in order for us to survive as humans we have to kill other living things. Plants come to mind . I do not support the wanton destruction of habitats. However we need find a balance. The issue is the obsession with continued economic growth. Surely we cannot grow indefinitely, there is only so much the world can take
Humanity will crack before the world will. We'll erase a lot of species first, sure, but three hundred million years from now the earth will be alive and three won't be any humans on it.
It's population growth, not economic growth that is the problem. Habitat destruction is primarily down to farming. We are literally eating the planet.
Population growth and economic growth are both the problem. We need to curb both, or we will complete the destruction of the biosphere.
If only the dodo hadn't been so delicious.
And slow and friendly....
Seems it was wiped out by introduced pigs and monkeys. So still extinct because of humans, just indirectly.
We're the supreme being. The most efficient killer.
You snooze you lose.
Sign in or create your Guardian account to recommend a comment