| Literature DB >> 23573209 |
Xiaona Li1, Hong S He, Zhiwei Wu, Yu Liang, Jeffrey E Schneiderman.
Abstract
Forest management under a changing climate requires assessing the effects of climate warming and disturbance on the composition, age structure, and spatial patterns of tree species. We investigated these effects on a boreal forest in northeastern China using a factorial experimental design and simulation modeling. We used a spatially explicit forest landscape model (LANDIS) to evaluate the effects of three independent variables: climate (current and expected future), fire regime (current and increased fire), and timber harvesting (no harvest and legal harvest). Simulations indicate that this forested landscape would be significantly impacted under a changing climate. Climate warming would significantly increase the abundance of most trees, especially broadleaf species (aspen, poplar, and willow). However, climate warming would have less impact on the abundance of conifers, diversity of forest age structure, and variation in spatial landscape structure than burning and harvesting. Burning was the predominant influence in the abundance of conifers except larch and the abundance of trees in mid-stage. Harvesting impacts were greatest for the abundance of larch and birch, and the abundance of trees during establishment stage (1-40 years), early stage (41-80 years) and old- growth stage (>180 years). Disturbance by timber harvesting and burning may significantly alter forest ecosystem dynamics by increasing forest fragmentation and decreasing forest diversity. Results from the simulations provide insight into the long term management of this boreal forest.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23573209 PMCID: PMC3613418 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059747
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Species life-history attributes for canopy species in northeastern China.
| Species | Common name | LONG | MTR | SHD | FIRE | EFFD | MAXD | VGP | MVP | CSEPs | WSEPs | DMAX | DMIN |
|
| Birch | 120 | 15 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2000 | 1 | 20 | 0.153 | 0.341 | 3100 | 600 |
|
| Aspen | 100 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2000 | 1 | 15 | 0.010 | 0.178 | 3000 | 800 |
|
| Poplar | 180 | 12 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2000 | 1 | 15 | 0.013 | 0.048 | 1900 | 400 |
|
| Willow | 250 | 18 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3000 | 0.9 | 15 | 0.018 | 0.054 | 2400 | 600 |
|
| Larch | 300 | 20 | 2 | 5 | 50 | 150 | 0 | 0 | 0.288 | 0.136 | 1900 | 400 |
|
| Spruce | 300 | 30 | 4 | 1 | 100 | 150 | 0 | 0 | 0.060 | 0.112 | 2500 | 800 |
|
| Mongolian Scots pine | 250 | 40 | 2 | 4 | 100 | 200 | 0 | 0 | 0.175 | 0.212 | 2400 | 700 |
|
| Dwarf pine | 250 | 30 | 3 | 3 | 50 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0.225 | 0.144 | 1400 | 300 |
LONG, longevity of the species (years); MTR, maturity age of the species (years); SHD, shade tolerance value (1–5) (no units), 1 = least tolerant, 5 = most tolerant; FIRE, fire tolerance value (1–5) (no nits), 1 = least tolerant, 5 = most tolerant; EFFD, species effective distance seeding range (m); MAXD, species maximum distance seeding range (m); VGP, probability of vegetative propagation following disturbance (no units); MVP, minimum age of vegetative propagation (years); CSEPs, probability of species establishment under current climate; WSEPs, probability of species establishment under climate warming scenario; DMAX, maximum growing degree day; DMIN, minimum growing degree day each species.
Figure 1The geographic location of the study area and different land types, among which water and nonforest are not simulated in the model.
Parameters of harvest scenario.
| Species | Age range (year) | % Area harvested (of each management area per decade | |||
| Cutting method | Harvest area | Restricted cutting area | Regeneration | ||
| Larch | 120–300 | clearcut | 0.5% | 0.3% | natural |
| Mongolian Scots Pine | 90–250 | clearcut | 0.5% | 0.3% | natural |
| Spruce | 120–300 | clearcut | 0.5% | 0.3% | natural |
| Birch | 60–150 | clearcut | 0.5% | 0.3% | natural |
| Aspen | 40–120 | clearcut | 0.5% | 0.3% | natural |
| Poplar | 50–180 | clearcut | 0.5% | 0.3% | natural |
The harvest scenario was adopted from current forest management of Huzhong Forest Bureau and was parameterized in LANDIS harvest module.
Comparison of forest composition outside the natural reserve under the current climate to observed value in Huzhong natural reserve.
| Huzhong natural reserve | Outside the natural reserve | |||
| %Observed | %Initial conditions | % Range (years 200–300) | %Mean (years 200–300) | |
| Species composition | ||||
| Aspen | 1.1 | 4.5 | 2.0–2.1 | 2.1 |
| Birch | 33.1 | 34.1 | 29.0–33.3 | 32.4 |
| Poplar | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.2–0.6 | 0.4 |
| Willow | 1.2 | 0.7 | 1.1–1.3 | 1.2 |
| Larch | 52.9 | 44.7 | 45.9–51.0 | 47.3 |
| Spruce | 1.0 | 1.3 | 2.6–3.4 | 3.0 |
| Mongolian Scots pine | 1.4 | 5.0 | 3.3–3.5 | 3.4 |
| Dwarf pine | 7.2 | 9.3 | 10.2–10.4 | 10.4 |
| Age composition | ||||
| Establishment (1–40 yr) | 3.4 | 12.9 | 3.7–6.0 | 4.5 |
| Early-stage (41–100 yr) | 9.6 | 42.8 | 8.8–13.0 | 10.4 |
| Mid-stage (101–140 yr) | 10.5 | 32.5 | 10.9–14.6 | 11.9 |
| Late-stage (141–180 yr) | 20.2 | 11.5 | 24.7–29.8 | 19.1 |
| Old-growth (>180 yr) | 56.3 | 0.3 | 47.8–62.5 | 54.2 |
Figure 2Responses of species composition to climate and fire under current harvest regime.
C150 represents the average of the simulated species abundance under current climate and fire regimes in 2000–2140 years; C300 represents the average of the simulated species abundance under current climate and fire regimes in 2150–2290 years; F150 represents the average of the simulated species abundance under future climate and fire regimes in 2000–2140 years; and F300 represents the average of the simulated species abundance under future climate and fire regimes in 2150–2290 years.
MANOVA results for species composition variables.
| Climate effect | Fire effect | Harvest effect | Fire×harvest | ||||||
| Simulation years | Species (%) | Variation explained (%) | t | Variation explained (%) | t | Variation explained (%) | t | Variation explained (%) | R2 |
| 150 (2140) | Aspen | 79.8 |
| 3.0 |
| 13.0 |
| 0.2 | 0.96 |
| Birch | 0.3 |
| 1.3 |
| 96.0 |
| 2.0 | 1.00 | |
| Poplar | 61.3 |
| 12.1 |
| 12.5 |
| 0.9 | 0.85 | |
| Willow | 90.3 |
| 0.06 | 0.63 | 4.6 |
| 0.3 | 0.95 | |
| Larch | 5.3 |
| 24.8 |
| 68.1 |
| 1.0 | 0.99 | |
| Spruce | 5.8 |
| 88.4 |
| 0.9 |
| 0.6 | 0.95 | |
| Mongolian Scots pine | 0.3 | 1.4 | 78.8 |
| 1.8 | 0.34 | 1.3 | 0.94 | |
| Dwarf pine | 0.02 |
| 99.2 |
| 0.4 |
| 0.3 | 1.00 | |
| 300 (2290) | Aspen | 92.9 |
| 2.1 |
| 3.7 |
| 0.001 | 0.99 |
| Birch | 1.7 |
| 58.6 |
| 38.6 |
| 0.02 | 0.99 | |
| Poplar | 82.4 |
| 0.3 |
| 1.0 | 0.91 | 0.01 | 0.82 | |
| Willow | 81.0 |
| 7.9 |
| 1.7 | 2.3 | 0.1 | 0.90 | |
| Larch | 0.7 |
| 37.1 |
| 58.4 |
| 2.2 | 0.98 | |
| Spruce | 10.9 |
| 78.4 |
| 0.6 |
| 0.4 | 0.89 | |
| Mongolian Scots pine | 39.4 |
| 51.7 |
| 11.0 |
| 0.3 | 0.89 | |
| Dwarf pine | 0.01 |
| 97.7 |
| 1.3 |
| 1.0 | 1.00 | |
The t values test the hypothesis that the response between levels of main effects are equal, and significant (α = 0.01) differences are indicated in boldface. All three main effects were significant in both years. Only the fire × harvest interaction was always significant and was included in the model. Significant interactions are indicated by asterisks.
P<0.01.
Positive t value means that response variable increases as climate warms.
Positive t value means that response variable increases as fires increases.
Positive t value means that response variable increases when harvest is added.
MANOVA results for forest age structure variables.
| Climate effect | Fire effect | Harvest effect | Fire×harvest | ||||||
| Simulation years | Seral stage (%) | Variation explained (%) | t | Variation explained (%) | t | Variation explained (%) | t | Variation explained (%) | R2 |
| 150 (2140) | Establishment | 0.4 |
| 40.8 |
| 58.6 |
| 0.1 | 1.00 |
| Early-stage | 7.4 |
| 5.3 |
| 85.5 |
| 0.6 | 0.99 | |
| Mid-stage | 0.7 |
| 97.3 |
| 0.08 |
| 1.8 | 1.00 | |
| Late-stage | 0.002 | 1.5 | 77.0 |
| 22.2 |
| 0.8 | 1.00 | |
| Old-growth | 0 | 0.77 | 5.1 |
| 94.8 |
| 0.09 | 1.00 | |
| 300 (2290) | Establishment | 0.2 |
| 8.6 |
| 89.4 |
| 1.4 | 1.00 |
| Early-stage | 2.0 |
| 6.6 |
| 90.8 |
| 0 | 0.99 | |
| Mid-stage | 28.2 |
| 52.2 |
| 7.3 |
| 1.5 | 0.88 | |
| Late-stage | 5.6 |
| 15.5 |
| 71.9 |
| 6.1 | 0.99 | |
| Old-growth | 0.2 |
| 0.09 |
| 99.2 |
| 0.4 | 1.00 | |
The t values test the hypothesis that the response between levels of main effects are equal, and significant (α = 0.01) differences are indicated in boldface. All three main effects were significant in both years. Only the fire × harvest interaction was always significant and was included in the model. Significant interactions are indicated by asterisks.
P<0.01.
Positive t value means that response variable increases as climate warms.
Positive t value means that response variable increases as fires increases.
Positive t value means that response variable increases when harvest is added.
MANOVA results for spatial pattern variables.
| Climate effect | Fire effect | Harvest effect | Fire×harvest | ||||||
| Simulation years | Pattern index | Variation explained (%) | T | Variation explained (%) | T | Variation explained (%) | t | Variation explained (%) | R2 |
| 150 (2140) | AI-seral stage | 2.4 |
| 52.3 |
| 44.2 |
| 0.7 | 1.00 |
| AI-birch | 0.2 |
| 0.2 |
| 95.9 |
| 3.5 | 1.00 | |
| AI-larch | 4.6 |
| 26.3 |
| 67.3 |
| 0.2 | 0.98 | |
| SHDI-seral stage | 0.9 |
| 52.4 |
| 40.3 |
| 6.3 | 1.00 | |
| SHDI-birch | 0.5 |
| 4.8 |
| 90.4 |
| 3.9 | 1.00 | |
| SHDI-larch | 2.3 |
| 45.9 |
| 45.9 |
| 5.8 | 1.00 | |
| 300 (2290) | AI-seral stage | 8.0 |
| 83.1 |
| 8.4 |
| 0.3 | 1.00 |
| AI-birch | 1.5 |
| 0.03 |
| 83.5 |
| 14.5 | 0.99 | |
| AI-larch | 33.5 |
| 5.4 | 1 | 34.0 |
| 11.0 | 0.82 | |
| SHDI-seral stage | 8.9 |
| 1.9 | 2.6 | 82.6 |
| 4.8 | 0.98 | |
| SHDI-birch | 0.007 | -0.27 | 19.8 |
| 76.9 |
| 0.14 | 0.96 | |
| SHDI-larch | 7.4 |
| 23.5 |
| 67.9 |
| 0.07 | 0.99 | |
The t values test the hypothesis that the response between levels of main effects are equal, and significant (α = 0.01) differences are indicated in boldface. All three main effects were significant in both years. Only the fire × harvest interaction was always significant and was included in the model. Significant interactions are indicated by asterisks.
P<0.01.
Positive t value means that response variable increases as climate warms.
Positive t value means that response variable increases as fires increases.
Positive t value means that response variable increases when harvest is added.
AI is the aggregation index of He et al. (2000) that reflects the tendency of like cells to be adjacent, SHDI is Shannon diversity index that reflects the heterogeneity of landscape.
Figure 3Total area burned per decade and the size distribution of fires (±SD) for 300 simulation years under current climate and future climate.