| Literature DB >> 27857204 |
Abstract
Understanding the influence of climate variability and fire characteristics in shaping postfire vegetation recovery will help to predict future ecosystem trajectories in boreal forests. In this study, I asked: (1) which remotely-sensed vegetation index (VI) is a good proxy for vegetation recovery? and (2) what are the relative influences of climate and fire in controlling postfire vegetation recovery in a Siberian larch forest, a globally important but poorly understood ecosystem type? Analysis showed that the shortwave infrared (SWIR) VI is a good indicator of postfire vegetation recovery in boreal larch forests. A boosted regression tree analysis showed that postfire recovery was collectively controlled by processes that controlled seed availability, as well as by site conditions and climate variability. Fire severity and its spatial variability played a dominant role in determining vegetation recovery, indicating seed availability as the primary mechanism affecting postfire forest resilience. Environmental and immediate postfire climatic conditions appear to be less important, but interact strongly with fire severity to influence postfire recovery. If future warming and fire regimes manifest as expected in this region, seed limitation and climate-induced regeneration failure will become more prevalent and severe, which may cause forests to shift to alternative stable states.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27857204 PMCID: PMC5114605 DOI: 10.1038/srep37572
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Study area with burned patches (2000–2010), and digital elevation model (DEM) map.
The DEM was download from SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission) website (http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/srtm/). Burned patches were manually digitized based on reported fire information and Landsat images (this study). The burned patch used for field measurement was also indicated. The map was produced in ArcGIS 10.3 (http://www.esri.com/).
Figure 2Hypothetical relationship among climate variability, fire regime, and postfire vegetation recovery in boreal forest ecosystems (see text for details).
Solid lines indicated mechanisms that were tested in current analysis.
predictors used to quantify the influence of climate, fire, and topography on postfire vegetation recovery in the boosted regression tree model.
| Variables | Descriptions and related mechanisms in | Hypothetical relationship with vegetation recovery | Range (median) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Year + 5 NDWI (unitless) | A proxy for postfire vegetation recovery status, 5-year postfire | −0.43–0.53 (0.20) | |
| RdNBR (unitless) | A proxy for fire severity, Relative dNBR (M1 & M3). | Negatively, higher fire severity consumes more seed stored in soil and canopy and reduces seed availability | 0–1.48 (0.36) |
| RdNBR_var (unitless) | A proxy for spatial variability of fire severity, standard deviation of RdNBR within a 120 m radius (M1) | Positively, higher spatial variability of fire severity increases the chance of tree survival and provides more seed within burned patches | 0.00117–0.334 (0.0455) |
| D2B (m) | A proxy for seed dispersal distance, distance to nearest unburned forest (M2) | Negatively, the probability of seed reach to a site decreases exponentially with distance to seed sources | 0–9999 (2790) |
| SHP_IDX (unitless) | A proxy for fire patch characteristics, shape index for each fire (M2). | Positively, higher patch complexity increase the probability of seed reach to a site from the seed source | 1–2.79 (1.71) |
| TAno_Summer + 0 (degree) | Summer temperature anomaly for the fire year (M4). | Unimodal, plants regenerate and grow better at the intermediate level of temperature | −0.88–1.48 (−0.83) |
| TAno_Winter + 0 (degree) | Winter temperature anomaly for the fire year (M4). | The same as TAno_Summer + 0 | −4.41–2.88 (0.39) |
| TAno_Summer + 1 (degree) | Summer temperature anomaly one year after fire (M4). | The same as TAno_Summer + 0 | −0.30–0.99 (0.30) |
| TAno_Summer + 1–5 (degree) | Average summer temperature anomaly from one to five years after fire (M5). | The same as TAno_Summer + 0 | −0.039–0.59 (−0.0089) |
| PAno_Summer + 0 (mm) | Summer precipitation anomaly for the fire year (M4). | Positive, plants regenerate and grow better at higher moisture availability | −45.41–58.95 (36.97) |
| PAno_Winter + 0 (mm) | Winter precipitation anomaly for the fire year (M4). | The same as PAno_Summer + 0 | −1.94–4.43 (0.55) |
| PAno_Summer + 1 (mm) | Summer precipitation anomaly one year after fire (M4). | The same as PAno_Summer + 0 | −45.41–21.08 (−11.54) |
| PAno_Summer + 1–5 (mm) | Average Summer precipitation anomaly from one to five years after fire (M5) | The same as PAno_Summer + 0 | −21.63–9.83 (−7.16) |
| DEM (m) | Elevation | Negative, higher elevation is often associated with higher fire severity and lower soil moisture, and decreases forest recovery | 177–1297 (416) |
| Slope (degree) | Slope | Negative, steeper slope has thinner soil layer and lower soil moisture, and decreases forest recovery | 0.000–17.3 (3.168) |
| Potential radiation (unitless) | A proxy for solar radiation and soil moisture | Negative, higher solar radiation decrease soil moisture, and decreases forest recovery | −1–1 (−0.099) |
Figure 3Distribution of Landsat images used to characterize the postfire vegetation recovery trajectory.
The image (August 28, 2011) used for calculating vegetation indices and correlating with field data is marked with an asterisk.
Figure 4Correlation among field measurement of stand density and ANPP, and different vegetation indices.
Circle represents correlation ellipses among variables. NDVI: Normalized Difference Vegetation Index, NDWI: Normalized difference water index, TCW: Tasseled Cap wetness, TCA: TC Angle.
Figure 5Postfire trajectories of vegetation indices in the study area.
Error bar stands for plus-or-minus standard deviation. NDVI: Normalized Difference Vegetation Index, NDWI: Normalized difference water index, TCW: Tasseled Cap wetness, TCA: TC Angle.
Figure 6Relative influences of variables that explained greater than 5% of the variation from boosted regression tree models of vegetation recovery.
For explanation of variables and their units see Table 1.
Figure 7Partial dependency plots for variables in a boosted regression tree predicting postfire vegetation recovery.
Partial dependency plots represent the estimated marginal effect of a variable on postfire recovery when all other variables are held at their average. The y-axis indicates the relative effects of a variable (x-axis) on vegetation recovery. Red lines indicate the marginal effects constrained in the model to be monotonic. Tick marks at the x-axis indicate the deciles (10% quantiles) of the observed distribution of continuous predictor variables. For explanation of variables and their units see Table 1.
Figure 8Three-dimensional partial dependence plots for the top four strongest interactions in the model for postfire vegetation recovery.
All variables except those graphed are held at their means. The z-axis indicates the relative effects of interactions between variables (x- and y-axis) on vegetation recovery. For explanation of variables and their units see Table 1.