2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.06.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A dynamic environment-sensitive site index model for the prediction of site productivity potential under climate change

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
19
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Information concerning trends in site productivity may provide essential information for management, as well as adaptation and mitigation strategies against changing climatic conditions [23]. There have been many site productivity simulations under the changing climate conditions of European forests [5,59,60]. The observed trends of increasing the average temperature and reducing rainfall during the growing season adversely affect North American species (e.g., lodgepole and white spruce) [61].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Information concerning trends in site productivity may provide essential information for management, as well as adaptation and mitigation strategies against changing climatic conditions [23]. There have been many site productivity simulations under the changing climate conditions of European forests [5,59,60]. The observed trends of increasing the average temperature and reducing rainfall during the growing season adversely affect North American species (e.g., lodgepole and white spruce) [61].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The site index considers the impact of climate conditions, expressing how the climatic and edaphic factors influence site productivity. Therefore, it is frequently used to analyze how environmental changes affect forest ecosystems [16][17][18][19][20]. Climate-sensitive site productivity models provide key information to develop forest management guidelines for adaptation steps and apply mitigation strategies against changing climatic conditions [21].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Inventory data or remotely sensed observations of canopy height provide a potential means for constructing age-height curves (Croft et al, 2014;Yue et al, 2016) to inform growth rates by age class. Alternately, Hiltner et al (2020) recently optimized mortality rates in an individual-based model at different forest successional stages by using satellite-derived proxies of tree mortality (Hiltner et al, 2020); their optimized model was shown to improve representation of forest states during post-disturbance regrowth.…”
Section: Opportunities For Improving Modeled Age Dynamicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the last decade, explicit model representation of forests as a function of time since disturbance (hereafter simply, "ecosystem age") has been a grand challenge in an effort to quantify the demographic response of forests to changes in climate, atmospheric CO 2 , land-use change and land management (LUCLM), and fire (Friend et al, 2014;Kondo et al, 2018;Pugh et al, 2019b). Much of the focus of these global modeling studies has been on the effect of natural and anthropogenic disturbances on the carbon dynamics in old-growth versus second-growth forests (Gitz and Ciais, 2003;Shevliakova et al, 2009;Kondo et al, 2018;Yue et al, 2018;Pugh et al, 2019b) but lack finer distinction of demographic effects at different age classes. Following a call to the science community to improve demographic representation in models (Fisher et al, 2016), there is now a growing list of global models that are capable of simulating global ecosystem demographics (Gitz and Ciais, 2003, OSCAR;Shevliakova et al, 2009, LM3V;Haverd et al, 2014, CABLE-POP;Lindeskog et al, 2013, LPJ-GUESS;Yue et al, 2018, ORCHIDEE MICT;Nabel et al, 2020, Jena Scheme for Biosphere Atmosphere Coupling in Hamburg version 4 -JSBACH4), although more models need the capability to represent landscape heterogeneity in forest structure and function.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%