2012
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02775.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Recovery of ponderosa pine ecosystem carbon and water fluxes from thinning and stand‐replacing fire

Abstract: Carbon uptake by forests is a major sink in the global carbon cycle, helping buffer the rising concentration of CO in the atmosphere, yet the potential for future carbon uptake by forests is uncertain. Climate warming and drought can reduce forest carbon uptake by reducing photosynthesis, increasing respiration, and by increasing the frequency and intensity of wildfires, leading to large releases of stored carbon. Five years of eddy covariance measurements in a ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa)-dominated ecosys… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

11
131
4
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 161 publications
(147 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
(127 reference statements)
11
131
4
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In lodgepole pine forests infested with mountain pine beetle (>84% trees impacted), Φ was 25-35% lower in a stand 1-4 years after attack compared to another 4-7 years after an outbreak, while the growing season (May-September) cumulative NEE averaged À50 g C m À2 with some recovery of the carbon sink over time [Brown et al, 2012]. A decade after a stand replacing fire in a ponderosa pine forest, NEE was still reduced (À9 to À23% for Φ direct (clear), À38 to À51% for Φ diffuse (cloudy), À68% to À82% for A max ) while the ecosystem functioned as an annual carbon source [Dore et al, 2012;Dore et al, 2008]. Yet in a nearby mechanical thinning treatment (35% basal area removed), changes in these parameters were less detectable while the annual carbon sink recovered within 3 years [Dore et al, 2012].…”
Section: 1002/2013jg002597mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In lodgepole pine forests infested with mountain pine beetle (>84% trees impacted), Φ was 25-35% lower in a stand 1-4 years after attack compared to another 4-7 years after an outbreak, while the growing season (May-September) cumulative NEE averaged À50 g C m À2 with some recovery of the carbon sink over time [Brown et al, 2012]. A decade after a stand replacing fire in a ponderosa pine forest, NEE was still reduced (À9 to À23% for Φ direct (clear), À38 to À51% for Φ diffuse (cloudy), À68% to À82% for A max ) while the ecosystem functioned as an annual carbon source [Dore et al, 2012;Dore et al, 2008]. Yet in a nearby mechanical thinning treatment (35% basal area removed), changes in these parameters were less detectable while the annual carbon sink recovered within 3 years [Dore et al, 2012].…”
Section: 1002/2013jg002597mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A decade after a stand replacing fire in a ponderosa pine forest, NEE was still reduced (À9 to À23% for Φ direct (clear), À38 to À51% for Φ diffuse (cloudy), À68% to À82% for A max ) while the ecosystem functioned as an annual carbon source [Dore et al, 2012;Dore et al, 2008]. Yet in a nearby mechanical thinning treatment (35% basal area removed), changes in these parameters were less detectable while the annual carbon sink recovered within 3 years [Dore et al, 2012]. The impacts on deciduous forests can be very different; in an aspen/birch girdling experiment (39% basal area affected), Φ was higher after treatment leading to a stable carbon sink [Gough et al, 2013].…”
Section: 1002/2013jg002597mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other studies have analysed responses of CO 2 uptake to different types of radiation (Knohl and Baldocchi, 2008;Niyogi et al, 2004;Oliphant et al, 2011;Urban et al, 2007Urban et al, , 2012, vapour pressure deficit, and temperature (Dewar et al, 1999;Pingintha et al, 2010). There are a few studies based on year-round data sets obtained on a daily basis (Dore et al, 2012). Some authors intentionally do not assess daily net ecosystem production (NEP) and its dependence on environmental factors because the overall impact of such shortterm events on the monthly or yearly ecosystem carbon budget is negligible (Allard et al, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The differences among various types of ecosystems in their CO 2 sequestration potentials are large (Litton et al, 2007;Marek et al, 2011), as the aforementioned processes operate on a variety of time scales and are influenced by a number of factors. These factors include climate and meteorological parameters (amount and quality of radiation, temperature, and humidity); physiological state of the ecosystem (its age, structure, species composition, and history); water, nutrient, and substrate availability; and such ecosystem disturbances as diseases, insects, and thinning (Dore et al, 2012;Xenakis et al, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation