Do rising temperatures always increase forest productivity? Interacting effects of temperature, precipitation, cloudiness and soil texture on tree species growth and competition

Gustafson, Eric J.; Miranda, Brian R.; Bruijn, Arjan M. G. de; Sturtevant, Brian R.; Kubiske, Mark E.

doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.08.001

Cited by 54 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The simulated lower water availability during the growing season is expected to become more severe in the future, restricting and even demoting forest growth. While this effect of lower water availability on forest growth is not confirmed by other investigations specific to Sweden, it is in line with other regional studies (Gustafson et al 2017;Reichstein et al 2007;von Buttlar et al 2018). The negative effect of the simulated climate change scenarios on ecosystem productivity is more expressed in the southern Sweden where elevated temperatures coincide with lower summer precipitation, as is corroborated by the findings by von Buttlar et al (2018).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Water limitation can negate the effect of higher temperatures on forest carbon sequestration

Belyazid

Zanchi

2019

Eur J Forest Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change will bring about a consistent increase in temperatures. Annual precipitation rates are also expected to increase in boreal countries, but the seasonal distribution will be uneven, and several areas in the boreal zone will experience wetter winters and drier summers. This study uses the dynamic forest ecosystem model ForSAFE to estimate the combined effect of changes in temperature and precipitation on forest carbon stocks in Sweden. The model is used to simulate carbon stock changes in 544 productive forest sites from the Swedish National Forest Inventory. Forest carbon stocks under two alternative climate scenarios are compared to stocks under a hypothetical scenario of no climate change (baseline). Results show that lower water availability in the future can cause a significant reduction in tree carbon compared to a baseline scenario, particularly expressed in the southern and eastern parts of Sweden. In contrast, the northwestern parts will experience an increase in tree carbon stocks. Results show also that summer precipitation is a better predictor of tree carbon reduction than annual precipitation. Finally, the change in soil carbon stock is less conspicuous than in tree carbon stock, showing no significant change in the north and a relatively small but consistent decline in the south. The study indicates that the prospect of higher water deficit caused by climate change cannot be ignored in future forest management planning.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Water limitation can negate the effect of higher temperatures on forest carbon sequestration

Belyazid

Zanchi

2019

Eur J Forest Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, during the solar "dimming" (i.e., when the total SSR decreased) between 1960 and 1980 both the diffuse fraction of PAR and the photosynthesis were enhanced (Mercado et al, 2009). It is further suggested that the BVOCs 30 emissions are less sensitive to the SSR compared to the temperature, which is identified as a more important driver for the BVOCs emission trends (Guenther et al, 2006;Lathière et al, 2006;Yue et al, 2015;Gustafson et al, 2017).…”

Section: Effects On Ozone Via Bvocs Emissions 15mentioning

confidence: 94%

Modeling the impact of solar brightening on summer surface ozone over Europe between 1990 and 2010

Oikonomakis

Aksoyoğlu

Wild

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

10Surface solar radiation (SSR) observations have indicated an increasing trend in Europe since the mid-1980s, referred to as solar "brightening". In this study, we used the regional air quality model, CAMx (Comprehensive Air Quality Model with extensions) to simulate and quantify, with various sensitivity runs (where the year 2010 served as the base case), the effects of increased radiation on photolysis rates (PHOT1, PHOT2 and PHOT3 scenarios) and biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) emissions (BIO scenario), and their consequent impacts on summer surface ozone concentrations over Europe 15 between 1990 and 2010. The PHOT1 and PHOT2 scenarios examined the effect of doubling and tripling the anthropogenic PM 2.5 concentrations, respectively, while the PHOT3 investigated the impact of an increase in just the sulfate concentrations by a factor of 3.4 (as in 1990), applied only to the calculation of photolysis rates. In the BIO scenario, we reduced the 2010 SSR by 3% (keeping plant cover and temperature the same), re-calculated the biogenic emissions and repeated the base case simulations with the new biogenic emissions. The impact on photolysis rates for all three scenarios was an increase (in 2010 20 compared to 1990) of 3-6% which resulted in daytime (10:00-18:00 Local Mean Time (LMT)) mean surface ozone differences of 0.2-0.7 ppb (0.5-1.5%), with the largest hourly difference rising as high as 4-8 ppb (10-16%). The effect of changes in BVOCs emissions on daytime mean surface ozone was much smaller (up to 0.08 ppb, ~ 0.2%), as isoprene and terpene (monoterpene and sesquiterpene) emissions increased only by 2.5-3% and 0.7%, respectively. Overall, the impact of the SSR changes on surface ozone was greater via the effects on photolysis rates compared to the effects on BVOCs 25 emissions, and the sensitivity test of their combined impact (PHOT3+BIO = COMBO scenario) showed nearly additive effects. In addition, all the sensitivity runs were repeated on a second base case with increased NO x emissions to account for any potential underestimation of modeled ozone production; the results did not change significantly in magnitude, but the spatial coverage of the effects was profoundly extended. Finally, the role of the solar "brightening" in the European summer surface ozone trends was suggested to be more important when comparing to the order of magnitude of the ozone trends 30Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi

show abstract

“…Blue contour lines show where the function has a constant value is supported by the acceleration of growth due to effects of the climate changes found in Europe (Pretzsch et al 2014), as well as in boreal Canada (Wu et al 2014), but not in the USA (Silva et al 2010). Especially if higher temperatures occur in combination with higher amounts of precipitation, the effect on growth can be positive (Gustafson et al 2017). Moreover, species traits, species composition, forest structure (Bohn and Huth 2017) and forest type (Vilà et al 2013) determine how forest productivity is influenced by climate and could have shaped the relationships found in our study.…”

Section: Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

Tree species richness enhances stand productivity while stand structure can have opposite effects, based on forest inventory data from Germany and the United States of America

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In recent studies, mixed forests were found to be more productive than monocultures with everything else remaining the same. Methods: To find out if this productivity is caused by tree species richness, by a more heterogeneous stand structure or both, we analyzed the effects of forest structure and tree species richness on stand productivity, based on inventory data of temperate forests in the United States of America and Germany. Results: Having accounted for effects such as tree size and stand density, we found that: (I) tree species richness increased stand productivity in both countries while the effect of tree size heterogeneity on productivity was negative in Germany but positive in the USA; (II) productivity was highest at sites with an intermediate amount of precipitation; and (III) growth limitations due water scarcity or low temperature may enhance structural heterogeneity. Conclusions: In the context of forest ecosystem goods and services, as well as future sustainable forest resource management, the associated implications would be: Tree species richness is vital for maintaining forest productivity. As an optimum amount of precipitation is accompanied by the highest productivity, changes in climatic conditions should be considered when planning. Resource limitations enhance structural heterogeneity, which in turn can have positive or negative effects on stand productivity. Furthermore, we discuss the difficulties encountered when analyzing different national forest inventories and large data sets.

show abstract

Do rising temperatures always increase forest productivity? Interacting effects of temperature, precipitation, cloudiness and soil texture on tree species growth and competition

Cited by 54 publications

References 48 publications

Water limitation can negate the effect of higher temperatures on forest carbon sequestration

Water limitation can negate the effect of higher temperatures on forest carbon sequestration

Modeling the impact of solar brightening on summer surface ozone over Europe between 1990 and 2010

Tree species richness enhances stand productivity while stand structure can have opposite effects, based on forest inventory data from Germany and the United States of America

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About