| Literature DB >> 23552070 |
Abstract
Understanding climate change-associated tree mortality is central to linking climate change impacts and forest structure and function. However, whether temporal increases in tree mortality are attributed to climate change or stand developmental processes remains uncertain. Furthermore, interpreting the climate change-associated tree mortality estimated from old forests for regional forests rests on an un-tested assumption that the effects of climate change are the same for young and old forests. Here we disentangle the effects of climate change and stand developmental processes on tree mortality. We show that both climate change and forest development processes influence temporal mortality increases, climate change-associated increases are significantly higher in young than old forests, and higher increases in younger forests are a result of their higher sensitivity to regional warming and drought. We anticipate our analysis to be a starting point for more comprehensive examinations of how forest ecosystems might respond to climate change.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23552070 PMCID: PMC3644074 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms2681
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Effect of year and its interactive effects with stand development processes on annual mortality probability.
| Model 1 | Intercept | −4.03 (−4.10 to −3.98) | −3.54 (−3.63 to −3.44) | −5.18 (−5.37 to −5.00) | −4.94 (−5.08 to −4.80) | −5.06 (−5.17 to −4.95) |
| Year ( × 10−2) | 2.63 (2.46–2.80) | 2.64 (2.34–2.95) | 3.41 (2.59–4.23) | 4.83 (4.39–5.27) | 4.47 (4.26–4.67) | |
| AUC | 0.711 | 0.748 | 0.768 | 0.750 | 0.754 | |
| Model 2 | Intercept | −4.33 (−4.40 to −4.27) | −3.67 (−3.81 to −3.59) | −5.44 (−5.63 to −5.25) | −4.76 (−4.90 to −4.62) | −4.86 (−4.97 to −4.75) |
| Year ( × 10−2) | 2.42 (2.13−2.71) | 3.63 (3.24−4.01) | 1.85 (0.80−2.89) | 3.83 (3.14−4.49) | 3.93 (3.55−4.33) | |
| Year × SA ( × 10−4) | −4.67 (−5.54 to −3.82) | −4.60 (−6.06 to −3.13) | −3.40 (−4.63 to −2.17) | −3.16 (−4.41 to −1.94) | −5.10 (−5.85 to −4.35) | |
| Year × 0.5RBA | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | |
| Year × SBA ( × 10−4) | NS | NS | NS | 5.46 (1.02−9.97) | 9.32 (6.85−11.70) | |
| Year × rFSBA ( × 10−2) | NS | NS | NS | 3.95 (2.20−5.69) | 6.05 (5.14−7.01) | |
| AUC | 0.812 | 0.819 | 0.825 | 0.777 | 0.776 |
Abbreviations: AUC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; NS, corresponding predictor’s posterior 95% credible interval covers 0 in the full model and the predictor was removed in the reduced model (Methods); RBA, relative basal area; rFSBA, ratio of focal species’ basal area to SBA; SA, stand age; SBA, stand basal area.
Values are estimated parameters (mean and 95% credible interval in brackets). Full table for Model 2 is presented in Supplementary Table S4. The models predictive performances were evaluated by AUC.
Figure 1Year effect on annual tree mortality probability and sensitivity scores of predictors.
(a) Year effect on annual tree mortality probability, logit (p), estimated by Model 1 (without endogenous factors as predictors) and Model 2 (with endogenous factors as predictors). Models were separately developed all plots (All), young plots (Young, initial SA ≤80 years) and old plots (Old, initial SA >80 years), respectively. Error bars are 95% credible intervals. (b) Sensitivity scores. For each species and age group (All, Young or Old), sensitivity scores of predictors from Model 1 are on the left and Model 2 on the right.
Figure 2Predicted temporal trends of annual mortality probability associated with calendar year.
The predicted means (solid lines) and their 95% credible intervals (dotted lines) of annual mortality probability are derived by using equation exp(β)−1, in which β is the fitted year coefficient from Model 1 (red) and Model 2 (blue) for each respective species in Table 1.
Effect of ATA or ACMIA and its interactive effects with stand development processes on annual mortality probability.
| Model 3 | Intercept | −4.29 (−4.36 to −4.23) | −3.91 (−4.03 to −3.79) | −5.44 (−5.64 to −5.24) | −5.00 (−5.11 to −4.89) | −4.90 (−4.98 to −4.81) |
| ATA ( × 10−1) | 4.67 (4.19–5.15) | 5.17 (4.35–6.00) | 5.44 (3.35–7.55) | 3.97 (3.00–4.90) | 5.26 (4.71–5.81) | |
| ATA × SA ( × 10−3) | −9.26 (−11.06 to −7.53) | −12.80 (−15.84 to −9.77) | NS | −4.37 (−6.57 to −2.33) | −7.52 (−8.91 to −6.17) | |
| ATA × 0.5RBA | NS | NS | −1.55 (−2.49 to −0.59) | NS | NS | |
| ATA × SBA ( × 10−3) | NS | NS | NS | NS | 7.75 (2.00–13.52) | |
| ATA × rFSBA( × 10−1) | 1.88 (0.27–3.47) | NS | NS | NS | 9.46 (7.39–11.49) | |
| AUC | 0.801 | 0.743 | 0.774 | 0.745 | 0.728 | |
| Model 4 | Intercept | −4.30 (−4.37 to −4.23) | −3.83 (−3.95 to −3.70) | −5.45 (−5.66 to −5.24) | −4.61 (−4.79 to −4.44) | −4.68 (−4.82 to −4.56) |
| ACMIA ( × 10−2) | −3.59 (−4.54 to −2.64) | −7.27 (−8.84 to −5.70) | −1.58 (−0.14 to −3.02) | −7.77 (−9.72 to −5.83) | −4.44 (−5.37 to −3.48) | |
| ACMIA × SA ( × 10−3) | 1.93 (1.56–2.29) | 1.99 (1.39–2.60) | NS | 0.57 (0.12–1.02) | 1.17 (0.89–1.46) | |
| ACMIA × 0.5RBA ( × 10−2) | −8.63 (−13.09 to −4.25) | NS | NS | NS | NS | |
| ACMIA × SBA | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | |
| ACMIA × rFSBA ( × 10−2) | NS | 7.33 (1.79–12.85) | NS | −12.01 (−17.81 to −6.23) | −14.57 (−18.41 to −10.74) | |
| AUC | 0.815 | 0.798 | 0.803 | 0.759 | 0.783 |
Abbreviations: ACMIA, annual climate moisture index anomaly; ATA, annual temperature anomaly; AUC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; NS, corresponding predictor’s posterior 95% credible interval covers 0 in the full model and the predictor was removed in the reduced model (Methods); RBA, relative basal area; rFSBA, ratio of focal species’ basal area to SBA; SA, stand age; SBA, stand basal area.
Values are estimated parameters (mean and 95% credible interval in brackets). Full tables for Model 3 and Model 4 are presented in Supplementary Tables S8 and S9, respectively. The models predictive performances were evaluated by AUC.