Literature DB >> 26485957

The agony of choice: different empirical mortality models lead to sharply different future forest dynamics.

Nicolas Bircher, Maxime Cailleret, Harald Bugmann.   

Abstract

Dynamic models are pivotal for projecting forest dynamics in a changing climate, from the local to the global scale. They encapsulate the processes of tree population dynamics with varying resolution. Yet, almost invariably, tree mortality is modeled based on simple, theoretical assumptions that lack a physiological and/or empirical basis. Although this has been widely criticized and a growing number of empirically derived alternatives are available, they have not been tested systematically in models of forest dynamics. We implemented an inventory-based and a tree-ring-based mortality routine in the forest gap model ForClim v3.0. We combined these routines with a stochastic and a deterministic approach for the determination of tree status (alive vs. dead). We tested the four new model versions for two Norway spruce forests in the Swiss Alps, one of which was managed (inventory time series spanning 72 years) and the other was unmanaged (41 years). Furthermore, we ran long-term simulations (-400 years) into the future under three climate scenarios to test model behavior under changing environmental conditions. The tests against inventory data showed an excellent match of simulated basal area and stem numbers at the managed site and a fair agreement at the unmanaged site for three of the four empirical mortality models, thus rendering the choice of one particular model difficult. However, long-term simulations under current climate revealed very different behavior of the mortality models in terms of simulated changes of basal area and stem numbers, both in timing and magnitude, thus indicating high sensitivity of simulated forest dynamics to assumptions on tree mortality. Our results underpin the potential of using empirical mortality routines in forest gap models. However, further tests are needed that span other climatic conditions and mixed forests. Short-term simulations to benchmark model behavior against empirical data are insufficient; long-term tests are needed that include both nonequilibrium and equilibrium conditions. Thus, there is the potential to greatly improve the robustness of future projections of forest dynamics via more reliable tree mortality submodels.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26485957     DOI: 10.1890/14-1462.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecol Appl        ISSN: 1051-0761            Impact factor:   4.657


  4 in total

1.  Size Matters a Lot: Drought-Affected Italian Oaks Are Smaller and Show Lower Growth Prior to Tree Death.

Authors:  Michele Colangelo; Jesús J Camarero; Marco Borghetti; Antonio Gazol; Tiziana Gentilesca; Francesco Ripullone
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 5.753

2.  Canopy mortality has doubled in Europe's temperate forests over the last three decades.

Authors:  Cornelius Senf; Dirk Pflugmacher; Yang Zhiqiang; Julius Sebald; Jan Knorn; Mathias Neumann; Patrick Hostert; Rupert Seidl
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 17.694

3.  Tree mortality submodels drive simulated long-term forest dynamics: assessing 15 models from the stand to global scale.

Authors:  Harald Bugmann; Rupert Seidl; Florian Hartig; Friedrich Bohn; Josef Brůna; Maxime Cailleret; Louis François; Jens Heinke; Alexandra-Jane Henrot; Thomas Hickler; Lisa Hülsmann; Andreas Huth; Ingrid Jacquemin; Chris Kollas; Petra Lasch-Born; Manfred J Lexer; Ján Merganič; Katarína Merganičová; Tobias Mette; Brian R Miranda; Daniel Nadal-Sala; Werner Rammer; Anja Rammig; Björn Reineking; Edna Roedig; Santi Sabaté; Jörg Steinkamp; Felicitas Suckow; Giorgio Vacchiano; Jan Wild; Chonggang Xu; Christopher P O Reyer
Journal:  Ecosphere       Date:  2019-02-20       Impact factor: 3.593

4.  An evaluation of multi-species empirical tree mortality algorithms for dynamic vegetation modelling.

Authors:  Timothy Thrippleton; Lisa Hülsmann; Maxime Cailleret; Harald Bugmann
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-10-06       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.