| Literature DB >> 29712940 |
Josep M Serra-Diaz1,2,3,4, Charles Maxwell5, Melissa S Lucash6, Robert M Scheller5, Danelle M Laflower7, Adam D Miller8, Alan J Tepley8, Howard E Epstein9, Kristina J Anderson-Teixeira8,10, Jonathan R Thompson7.
Abstract
The impacts of climatic changes on forests may appear gradually on time scales of years to centuries due to the long generation times of trees. Consequently, current forest extent may not reflect current climatic patterns. In contrast with these lagged responses, abrupt transitions in forests under climate change may occur in environments where alternative vegetation states are influenced by disturbances, such as fire. The Klamath forest landscape (northern California and southwest Oregon, USA) is currently dominated by high biomass, biodiverse temperate coniferous forests, but climate change could disrupt the mechanisms promoting forest stability (e.g. growth, regeneration and fire tolerance). Using a landscape simulation model, we estimate that about one-third of the Klamath forest landscape (500,000 ha) could transition from conifer-dominated forest to shrub/hardwood chaparral, triggered by increased fire activity coupled with lower post-fire conifer establishment. Such shifts were widespread under the warmer climate change scenarios (RCP 8.5) but were surprisingly prevalent under the climate of 1949-2010, reflecting the joint influences of recent warming trends and the legacy of fire suppression that may have enhanced conifer dominance. Our results demonstrate that major forest ecosystem shifts should be expected when climate change disrupts key stabilizing feedbacks that maintain the dominance of long-lived, slowly regenerating trees.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29712940 PMCID: PMC5928035 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-24642-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1The Klamath forest landscape biome transition and forest dynamic feedbacks triggering transitions. (a) Study area temperature, precipitation, and initial forest dominant type (left to right), and (b) feedbacks that maintain the two forest community states (adapted from[24]). CON represents conifer forest community states, SCH represent shrubland-chaparral-hardwood community state. Maps were created using ArcGIS v.10.5 (www.ersi.com/argis).
Figure 2Climate seasonal regimes and the simulated effects on forest productivity. (a) Temperature and (b) Precipitation under baseline and climate change conditions for the Klamath landscape. Effects of climate on forest net primary productivity (NPP) in two locations chosen to highlight the model’s response to environmental gradient under all climate scenarios: (c) warm-wet and (d) warm-dry. See Table 1 for climate change scenario acronyms. Time-periods: Early 2015–2042, Mid 2043–2070, Late 2071–2100. Maps were created using ArcGIS v.10.5 (www.ersi.com/argis).
Baseline and climate change scenario projections. Relative projections are a qualitative description of Fig. S1 offered here to assist with synthesis. These categories are based on average annual statistics over the course of the simulation (85 years) for mean annual temperature and annual precipitation. Annual probability of establishment shifts across species in conifer and shrubland-chaparral-hardwood (SCH) species under different climatic conditions. These values are averages across species and time.
| Climate Scenario | Emissions scenario (RCP) | Climate model | Relative projections* | Fire Rotation Period*1 | Median Fire sizeb (ha) | Total burned area in large high severity patches >50 ha (×1,000 ha) | Persistent shift from conifer to hardwood-chaparral (×1,000 ha) | Annual establishment probability*2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conifers | SCH | ||||||||
| Baseline (1949–2010) | na | na | na | 108 [104–123] | 5,091 | 448 | 580 | 0.23 | 0.30 |
| Mi26 | 2.6 | MIROC5 | Mild hot – wetter | 114 [98–117] | 5,029 | 498 | 580 | 0.17 (26%) | 0.28 (7%) |
| Cn45 | 4.5 | CNRM-CM5 | Hotter – wetter | 108 [91–116] | 5,567 | 529 | 613 | 0.18 (22%) | 0.29 (3%) |
| Ac85 | 8.5 | ACCESS | Much hotter - drier | 89 [82–100] | 6,314 | 582 | 622 | 0.15 (35%) | 0.25 (17%) |
| Ca85 | 8.5 | CanESM2 | Much hotter - wetter | 91 [82–99] | 6,102 | 594 | 606 | 0.14 (39%) | 0.24 (20%) |
*See Fig. S1 for quantitative values.
*1Range in brackets indicates 25th–75th percentile.
*2Percentages in parenthesis indicate the percentage of probability of establishment loss with respect to baseline conditions.
Figure 3Fire regime model outputs. (a) Fire return period – time to burn an area of the same size of the area of study; (b) Average fire size for different simulation repetitions under baseline and climate change scenarios; (c) Total area of high severity fire for different scenarios; (d) High severity area change for large fire patches (>50 ha). Boxplot represents different the distribution of values across 9 simulation repetitions. See Table 1 for climate change scenario acronyms.
Figure 4Time series of maximum fire size for different model simulation. Horizontal solid line indicates the historical maximum fire size recorded in the area (Biscuit fire 202,000 ha). See Table 1 for climate change scenario acronyms.
Figure 5Spatial distribution of mean fire return intervals (MFRI) in the area. MFRI above 85 indicates that no fire was recorded in the area for the simulations analyzed. See Table 1 for climate change scenario acronyms. Maps were created using raster package v 2.3.40 in R 3.3.0 (https://www.r-project.org/).
Figure 6Shifts in forest type. (a) Forest dominance shifts compared to initial conditions. (b) Similarity index between four climate change scenarios and baseline conditions. The index describes how many of the climate change scenarios agree with the baseline scenario (4 = maximum agreement, 0 = maximum disagreement); and (c) Area of conifer forest transitions remaining as conifer (CON) or shifted to shrubland-hardwood (SCH). Dominance shift from CON to SCH was calculated when SCH dominance was persistent for more than 30 years See Table 1 for climate change scenario acronyms. Maps were created using raster package v 2.3.40 in R 3.3.0 (https://www.r-project.org/).