2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.sajb.2018.02.394
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How vulnerable are ecosystems in the Limpopo province to climate change?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
1
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Projected biome changes towards woody vegetation under eCO 2 are consistent with results from previous studies on regional (Doherty et al., 2010) and continental scale (Conradi et al, 2020; Gonzalez et al., 2010; Higgins & Scheiter, 2012; Niang et al., 2014; Scholze et al., 2006; Sitch et al., 2008). The transition of grassland and savanna biomes, that is, C 4 ‐dominated biomes, to more woody biomes, that is, C 3 ‐dominated biomes, in eCO 2 simulations corroborates findings that savannas and grasslands are particularly vulnerable to biome changes under eCO 2 (Higgins & Scheiter, 2012; Osborne et al., 2018; Scheiter et al., 2018). Woody encroachment into grasslands and savannas in Africa is a major threat to their biodiversity (Bond, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 74%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Projected biome changes towards woody vegetation under eCO 2 are consistent with results from previous studies on regional (Doherty et al., 2010) and continental scale (Conradi et al, 2020; Gonzalez et al., 2010; Higgins & Scheiter, 2012; Niang et al., 2014; Scholze et al., 2006; Sitch et al., 2008). The transition of grassland and savanna biomes, that is, C 4 ‐dominated biomes, to more woody biomes, that is, C 3 ‐dominated biomes, in eCO 2 simulations corroborates findings that savannas and grasslands are particularly vulnerable to biome changes under eCO 2 (Higgins & Scheiter, 2012; Osborne et al., 2018; Scheiter et al., 2018). Woody encroachment into grasslands and savannas in Africa is a major threat to their biodiversity (Bond, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 74%
“…As opposed to Scheiter et al. (2018), the use of daily climate input data for our simulations helped to avoid the generation of daily climate time series with the aDGVM and thus removed the associated stochasticity. In addition, the high spatial resolution of our simulations effectively acts as a replication in space with smooth simulation patterns in space indicating low aDGVM‐caused variability in the simulation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The aDGVM is individual-based and simulates state variables such as biomass, height and photosynthetic rates of individual plants. This approach allows us to model how herbivores , fire (Scheiter and Higgins, 2009) and land use (Scheiter and Savadogo, 2016;Scheiter et al, 2019) impact individual plants as a function of plant traits. Grasses are simulated by two super-individuals, representing grasses beneath or between tree canopies.…”
Section: Model Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, we only considered changes in CO 2 in this study whereas changes in other key variables influencing vegetation, particularly precipitation and temperature, were ignored. Previous aDGVM studies show that change in CO 2 is the main driver of simulated future vegetation change due to strong CO 2 fertilization effects (Scheiter and Higgins, 2009;Scheiter et al, 2015Scheiter et al, , 2018. We therefore expect that using time series of both CO 2 and climatic drivers following RCP scenarios will not change the fundamental results of our study.…”
Section: Implications For Vegetation Modelingmentioning
confidence: 81%