It is considered highly probable that the climate in Europe will indeed change over the next century, magnifying the current regional differences. Annual temperatures over Europe are due to increase with the greatest warming in southern Europe (Spain, Italy, Greece) and northeast Europe (Finland, western Russia) increasing by 4 °C by 2071-2100 (IPCC, 2013), with the least warming (<2 °C) along the Atlantic coastline. These differences will be particularly apparent in the south during the summer with southern Europe warming at a rate of between 0.2 and 0.6 °C per decade and northern Europe warming between 0.08 and 0.3 °C per decade. Annual precipitation is also likely to show a marked gradient with latitude with southern Europe becoming 15-20% drier (at a rate of 5% per decade) and Scandinavia and western Russia becoming 10-20% wetter (IPCC, 2013). This increasing latitudinal disparity in precipitation will also be more pronounced in summer, with the south being much drier and the north much wetter. Thus, in southern Europe, climate change is projected to worsen conditions for plants (high temperatures and drought), with an increase in wildfires, in a region already vulnerable to climate variability. The north and west will be less affected by long-term drought, and may instead suffer from increased periodic waterlogging or flooding, but high temperatures and episodes of water shortage by high evapotranspiration will be a problem.

Across Europe, these changes are likely to lead to extensive species loss (Allen et al., 2009), in some areas up to 60% loss of individuals (IPCC, 2013). Despite trees being robust to short-term weather changes there is also likely to be a long-term decline in some tree species (particularly northern spruces and pines) and an expansion of Mediterranean species, and a lowering in tree density (Hanewinkel et al., 2013). They suggest that the loss to forestry from these changes by 2100 will cost Europe >€190 billion.

It has been recognised that yew (Taxus baccata) is a relic of a moderate Tertiary climate (Thomas & Polwart, 2003) and as a result of this ancestry modern trees grow best in the high humidity of mild oceanic climates, as do most other Taxus species (Figure 1). Thus, Taxus baccata forms dense, pure woodlands in the middle of its range across Central Europe into the British Isles, thinning out to small clumps and individual trees in moist niches at the extremities of its range, becoming a montane tree in the south and using the overstorey of other trees and north-facing slopes to provide oceanic-like conditions around each individual. It is also recognised that yew is undoubtedly the longest-lived of all European trees, readily reaching a maximum age of over 2,000 years and possibly even 5,000 years old (Thomas & Polwart, 2003).

Yew is under threat. It has become locally extinct or reduced to individual trees or small populations over the past 4,000 years in many parts of Europe and the former Soviet Union (Thomas & Polwart, 2003; Kassioumis et al., 2004) and this decline is continuing. This has led to many concerns over its long-term future (Dhar et al., 2006; Iszkuło et al., 2009; Linares, 2013; Devaney et al., 2014) and yew is now legally protected in a number of European countries (Hageneder, 2007) and has priority status under the EU Habitats Directive (European Commission, 2007). This decline is likely attributable to a wide range of reasons, undoubtedly partly due to climate change so far, but also due to excessive felling and other human disturbance.

However, the story of decline is not clear-cut since some populations have been seen to expand where conditions are suitable (Seidling, 1999) or management has been favourable (Svenning & Magård, 1999). In Norway, regeneration seems to be healthy (13,000+ 1-year old seedlings ha^–1 – Dhar et al., 2006). Indeed, in the British Isles, Preston et al. (2002) show a slight expansion in yew distribution in the British Isles between 1930-69 and 1987-99 (although this may in part be due to changing from recording trees that were felt to be native to recording all trees whether native or introduced). Even in the southermost areas of Europe, an increase in some yew populations has been detected where conditions are currently climatically suitable, (annual rainfall >800 mm and mean evapotranspiration ≤700 mm y^–1) in both Atlantic and sub-Mediterranean biogeographic regions (Carvalho et al., 1999; Cortes et al., 2000; Kassioumis et al., 2004; Fernandez-Manso et al., 2011; Serra & Garcia-Martí, 2011). In these cases, expansion occurred more than a decade ago before the abandonment of rural land and the consequent reduction in livestock pressure.

In summary, yew is a tree that has long been under threat in Europe despite some localised increase, and it is likely that climate change will be an increasing threat. Since it needs a fairly oceanic climate, and with individuals likely to meet a considerable change in climate over their long life, yew is highly likely to be negatively affected by changes in climate. Having said this, can we predict how yew will be affected across its wide European range?

It is expected that plant species in Europe will continue to move north as their preferred climatic conditions shift. On a world scale, Loarie et al. (2009) calculated that temperature bands are due to move north at an anticipated rate of 0.42 km y^–1. Plants are also moving up mountains for the same reason (Peñuelas et al., 2007). But it is not straightforward to predict how far trees will move northwards in the future.

It has so far proved difficult to match the current distribution of yew to specific climate parameters (the ‘bioclimate envelope’ – Pearson et al., 2002; Pearson & Dawson, 2003) due to the number of other factors affecting where the trees are found, particularly human exploitation and specific soil needs. An idea of the potential range of trees based on bioclimate envelopes has been produced by Sykes et al. (1996); this is bigger than the actual range due to the other factors such as suitable soils, topography and human interference. Svenning & Skov (2004) take this further and calculate the realised/potential (R/P) range using similar methods. Across all European tree species the mean R/P = 38% (±30% SD). For many dominant species, this ratio is higher (e.g. beech Fagus sylvatica 74%; oaks Quercus robur/petraea 91/84%) showing that they tend to fill the majority of their potential range. However for yew, R/P was calculated as 51%, indicating that it fills just over half of its potential range. This is obviously partly due to the fairly narrow soil requirements of yew, restricting where it grows even within a suitable climate. But even on wetter northern sites, where yew should find better optimum climatic conditions and would be less restricted to calcareous soils, it is absent.

This raises the question of whether the northwards shift in species range, by expansion in the north and contraction in the south, will actually happen in yew. Svenning & Skov 2004 build on this by suggesting that yew has been limited by poor dispersal ability from postglacial times onwards, so it is still slowly moving into suitable areas. Since yew has yet to catch up with 10,000 years of postglacial climate change, it is unlikely to respond with any speed to the current rapid rate of climate change. This may be compounded in the west of its range since here it is largely restricted to calcareous soils. These have a very patchy distribution and become a series of stepping stones with sufficiently large gaps between to prevent the spread of yew by seed. Further east and north, yew will grow on almost any soil (Elwes & Henry, 1906) but is still favoured by calcareous soil (Voliotis, 1986), so while this stepping stone affect may not prevent colonisation of new areas outside of western areas it is likely to have a weakening effect on new seedling establishment on sub-optimum soil.

Another facet controlling northerly migration is the need for the migrating species to be able to compete with the resident species. On calcareous soils, yew is a very strong competitor for light and water, resulting in few other trees, shrubs or herbaceous species surviving beneath the yews (Rodwell, 1991). However, on less favourable soils, yew faces competition from shade-tolerant trees such as Fagus sylvatica (Thomas & Polwart, 2003) which will further impede migration.

Many trees species are likely to show only limited tracking of fast climatic changes since conditions are generally happening too quickly to allow them to cope. For example, Zhu et al. (2012) working in eastern N. America suggest that as climate warms, seedlings should precede adult trees in the north (as the range expands) and the other way round in the south as range contracts due to loss of competitive advantage it had under cooler conditions. Despite the rate of change in temperature across the region being mostly slower than the global 0.42 km y^–1 predicted by Loarie et al. (2009), Zhu et al. (2012) found that for many species this northerly expansion is not happening. For the 92 species they looked at, the average range contraction in the south was 29 km, much as expected. However, they also found a range contraction at the north end of 42 km. It appears that since seedlings are more sensitive to variations in temperature (as Grubb and Harper both noted back in 1977), the climate is already too inhospitable at the north end of a tree’s range to allow seedling establishment. Thus, it seems likely that many trees will have problems moving north, and yew will be particularly challenged since it is additionally burdened by its slow dispersal abilities and its edaphic needs.

This makes the prediction of the future distribution more difficult but it seems probable that yew will not migrate northwards at the rate suggested by suitable climatic envelopes, and indeed the northern range may even contract southwards as adult trees die.

In defiance of expectations it is likely that yew will not contract northwards away from the very southern end of its current. The southernmost remnant yew woods in Algeria (Riff and Telllian Atlas) and Morocco (Riff and Mid Atlas mountains) are located in humid and subhumid environments (Charco, 2007; Hamidouche et al., 2014) where the rainfall currently exceeds 1,200 mm y^–1. This is more than the ecological requirement of yew, buffering individuals against climate change, particularly the vulnerable seedlings (Hamidouche et al., 2014). Moreover, there is room for these populations to spread altitudinally at a local level if they can move fast enough. Further north, however, relict populations in the south-east of the Iberian Peninsula are in a much more vulnerable, marginal situation, already at the potential limit of their climatic tolerance. Current rainfall is already <600 mm y^–1 in some places, and these populations are likely to go extinct. Contraction at the southern end of the range is thus likely to create disjunct populations.

Taxus baccata is undoubtedly the most shade-tolerant tree in Europe (Thomas & Polwart, 2003), growing in <1% sunlight, although it survives and grows better with less shade outside of its own canopy. Seed production and subsequent seedling growth is also better under lighter shade (<5% sunlight) although yew seedlings will survive <2% full sunlight (Dhar et al., 2007; Ruprecht et al., 2010; Iszkuło, 2010; Linares, 2013). This should help yew to find suitable microclimates beneath the canopy of other trees. Yew is also very tolerant of high temperature, with an LT₅₀ at 51 °C of 30 minutes (Lange, 1961). Similarly, the optimum temperature range for photosynthesis (14-25 °C) is the highest of any gymnosperm, with a summer maximum of 38-41 °C (Pisek et al., 1969). It is therefore extremely unlikely that predicted higher temperatures by themselves will have a detrimental effect on yew. Yew is sensitive to prolonged and severe frost (Brzeziecki & Kienast, 1994), particularly in the spring. However, it is tolerant of low temperatures while winter hardened; needles in southern Sweden have been shown to survive −33 °C to −35 °C (Till, 1956). In terms of precipitation, Taxus baccata performs best under high humidity and rainfall; in England 80% of yew woods occur where maximum rainfall is >1000 mm y⁻¹ (Tittensor, 1980) although at the southern end of its range it survives in small populations in as little as 569 mm y^–1 (Mount Stratoniko, Greece), 564 mm y^–1 (Chera Natural Park, Spain) and 518 mm y^–1 (Pedro Andres, Spain) (Katsavou & Ganatsas, 2012; AEMET, 2014) but only where protected from excessive evapotranspiration by topography or a dense overstorey. Yew is tolerant of temporary waterlogging as can be caused by extreme weather events. Rather paradoxically yew is also tolerant of drought; Brzeziecki & Kienast (1994) ranked T. baccata as 2 in a 1–5 scale where 1 is very tolerant of drought.

The extra carbon dioxide fuelling climate change may itself increase growth of T. baccata but is likely to do so only under heavy shade (<1% sunlight) and possibly less than in its competitors such as Fagus sylvatica (Hättenschwiler & Körner, 2000; Hättenschwiler, 2001). Using this information, we can make some predictions as to what will happen to yew in different parts of its range.

In the central part of its range, where yew creates dense, pure woodlands, some regeneration appears in gaps with shrubs but mostly it occurs in light, open areas surrounding existing woodlands (Svenning & Magård, 1999 Thomas & Polwart, 2003; Devaney et al., 2014). This is likely to expose seeds (which mostly germinate in the second or even third year after reaching the ground – Melzack & Watts, 1982) and new seedlings to the full force of the changing climate. In the south, where yew is scattered through more open woodlands, this may cause less of a problem since the seedlings will have some overstorey above them buffering them from harsh conditions and the yew seedlings will still be highly competitive (Iszkuło & Boratyński, 2006; Dhar et al., 2007; Ruprecht et al., 2010).

A further complication is that the competitive species will change with climate. For example in Lithuania, the current climate is suitable for yew but populations are small. But by 2031-2060, Ozolinčius et al. (2014) suggest that the climate will be suitable for a number of highly competitive species including sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus, beech Fagus sylvatica, and to a lesser extent field maple Acer campestre, which will invade the forests. By 2061–2090 these will be joined by large leaved lime Tilia platyphyllos, with the potential to change the success of yew regeneration (Packham et al., 2012). At the end of the twenty-first century, sweet chestnut Castanea sativa could also invade the woodland, further increasing competition against the yew, itself weakened by climate change.

Seed production of yew is likely to decrease with climate change. Implicit in this is reduced pollen production with increasing temperatures. Mercuri et al. (2013) noted that in northern Italy the amount of pollen being produced by yew declined over an 18 year period while at the same time the overall pollen concentration of total woody species went up. Yew acts as a winter flowering plant and so, paradoxically, pollen production is delayed in spring with warmer temperatures and stops sooner, producing a shorter pollen release period. Being dioecious, with separate male and female trees, pollination is more successful with male and female trees in close proximity. Long-term population fragmentation and shrinking population size are thus likely to lead to lower fertilization and production of viable seed (Fahrig, 2002, 2003; Allison, 1990). This is being compounded by a decrease in the proportion of females in response to climate. Iszkuło et al. (2009) found that drought leads to loss of female trees in competition with males. Their findings agree with previous research (Obeso, 2002) that the increased reproductive effort in females appears to make them more susceptible to the effects of drought. Certainly, while growth is negatively correlated with high temperatures in August and September, females in western Poland produce wider rings in wetter summers (Cedro & Iszkuło, 2011).

It is also highly likely that population changes in animal seed-dispersers associated with yew will affect yew regeneration. Removal of larger mammals and birds is highly likely to reduce the long-distance dispersal of seeds (the Empty Forest Syndrome of Jordano et al., 2007) with consequent reduction in genetic mixing. Loss of the larger fauna may also have a direct effect on seed size, with smaller birds taking only smaller seeds, potentially leading to a rapid evolutionary reduction in seed mass as has been seen in other species (Galetti et al., 2013) which would reduce the probability of regeneration success since smaller seed and thus seedlings would be more prone to drought stress.

Smaller and more isolated populations also produce a high degree of inbreeding in yew populations (Dubreuil et al., 2008; Myking et al., 2009) limiting the genetic diversity. Indeed, Lewandowski et al. (1995) noted that new progeny show much higher levels of inbreeding, probably because of limited seed-dispersal and mating between close neighbours. However, they also showed that loss of genetic variation in depleted populations is not necessarily a problem since a strongly declining population in Poland showed high levels of genetic diversity. This is probably because yew is an inherently genetically variable species compared with other conifers (Ledig, 1986) and high genetic variation is encouraged by dioecy and wind pollination.

It is clear from the above that while yew trees will survive in the short-term, and may even expand in number, the adult trees will gradually succumb to environmental pressure albeit slowly within the main range but especially in southern Europe. Long before that, regeneration will have largely disappeared particularly in the south and certainly decreased in the centre and north of its current range. This will happen without the benefit of the range expanding to the north and providing new territory with a cooler, wetter climate. Without human intervention, in the long-term yew will go into an ‘extinction debt’ in many areas, that is, it will effectively be an extinct species with no reproduction but the last individuals have yet to die. Indeed many southern populations are likely to already be at this stage. For many of us this would be a disaster in itself, but it also has wider implications than the loss of one species since yew is home to myriad insects and fungi (Thomas & Polwart, 2003) and other ecosystem services including carbon storage; loss of old trees in old woodlands will lower primary productivity and carbon storage (Bonan 2008, Michaletz et al., 2014).

Conservation programmes are already underway throughout the range of yew (e.g. Dhar et al., 2007; Piovesan et al., 2009) but where should the priorities lie? The exact order of priority will, of course vary depending upon geographical location and dominant environmental stressors, and upon local management objectives, but we offer the following recommendations in approximate order of effectiveness weighed against cost.

The main objective of any management must be to safeguard older trees (both as seed sources but also because the oldest trees are irreplaceable in the lifetime of humans), ensure regeneration of the next trees, and maintain the ecological integrity of stands that contain yews. In this way species dependant on yew will continue to thrive, and many generations to come will enjoy this splendid tree.