Climatic Change

, Volume 87, Supplement 1, pp 193–213 | Cite as

Climate change impacts on forest growth and tree mortality: a data-driven modeling study in the mixed-conifer forest of the Sierra Nevada, California

  • John J. Battles
  • Timothy Robards
  • Adrian Das
  • Kristen Waring
  • J. Keith Gilless
  • Gregory Biging
  • Frieder Schurr
Article

Abstract

We evaluated the impacts of climate change on the productivity and health of a forest in the mixed-conifer region in California. We adapted an industry-standard planning tool to forecast 30-years of growth for forest stands under a changing climate. Four projections of future climate (two global climate models and two emission forecasts) were examined for forests under three management regimes. Forest structural and tree demographic data from the Blodgett Forest Research Station in El Dorado County were used to fit our projections to realistic management regimes. Conifer tree growth declined under all climate scenarios and management regimes. The most extreme changes in climate decreased productivity, as measured by stem volume increment, in mature stands by 19% by 2100. More severe reductions in yield (25%) were observed for pine plantations. The reductions in growth under each scenario also resulted in moderate increases in susceptibility to non-catastrophic (i.e., non fire) causes of mortality in white fir (Abies concolor). For the worst case, median survival probability decreased from the baseline rate of 0.997 year−1 in 2002 to 0.982 year−1 by the end of the century.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aber J, Neilson RP, McNulty S, Lenihan JM, Bachlet D, Drapek RJ (2001) Forest process and global environmental change: predicting the effects of individual and multiple stressors. Bioscience 51:735–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ainsworth EA, Long SP (2005) What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2. New Phytol 165:351–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson JL, Balaji V, Broccoli AJ, Cooke WF, Delworth TL, Dixon KW, Donner LJ, Dunne KA, Freidenreich SM, Garner ST, Gudgel RG, Gordon CT, Held IM, Hemler RS, Horowitz LW, Klein SA, Knutson TR, Kushner PJ, Langenhost AR, Lau NC, Liang Z, Malyshev SL, Milly PCD, Nath MJ, Ploshay JJ, Ramaswamy V, Schwarzkopf MD, Shevliakova E, Sirutis JJ, Soden BJ, Stern WF, Thompson LA, Wilson RJ, Wittenberg AT, Wyman BL (2004) The new GFDL global atmosphere and land model AM2-LM2: Evaluation with prescribed SST simulations. J Climate 17:4641–4673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biging GS, Meerschaert W, Robards TA, Turnblom EC (1991) The Forest Stand Generator (STAG) User’s Guide Version 4.0. Research Note No. 34. http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/~wensel/cactos/stag/stag.htm. Cited 16 May 2006
  5. Bigler C, Bugmann H (2004) Predicting the time of tree death using dendrochronological data. Ecol Appl 14:902–914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Briceño-Elizondo E, Garcia-Gonzalo J, Peltola H, Matala J, Kellomäki (2006) Sensitivity of growth of Scots pine, Norway spruce, and silver birch to climate change and forest management in boreal conditions. For Ecol Manag 232:152–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bugmann HKM, Wullschleger SD, Price DT, Ogle K, Clark DF, Solomon AM (2001) Comparing the performance of forest gap models in North America. Clim Change 51:349–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cayan D, Maurer E, Dettinger M, Tyree M, Hayhoe K, Bonfils C, Duffy P, Santer B (2006) Climate scenarios for California. Public Interest Energy Research, California Energy Commission. CEC-500-2005-203-SFGoogle Scholar
  9. Cherubini P, Fontana G, Rigling D, Dobbertin M, Brang P, Innes JL (2002) Tree-life history prior to death: two fungal root pathogens affect tree-ring growth differently. J Ecol 90:839–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Das A, Battles JJ, Stephenson NL, van Mantgem PJ (2007) The relationship between tree growth patterns and likelihood of mortality: a study of two tree species in the Sierra Nevada. Can J For Res 37:580–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Franklin JF, Fites-Kaufman JA (1996) Analysis of late successional forests. In: Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final report to Congress, vol. II, chap. 21. Davis: University of California, Centers for Water and Wildland ResourcesGoogle Scholar
  12. FRAP (Fire and Resource Assessment Program) (2003) The Changing California: Forest and Range Assessment 2003. Online technical report of the California Fire and Resource Assessment Program. http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/assessment2003/. Cited 10 October 2005
  13. Gordon T (2005) The establishment of pitch canker in the Sierra Nevada. Poster at the UC Exotic/Invasive Pest and Disease Research Program Workshop. University of California, Davis, 12 October 2005Google Scholar
  14. Hayhoe K, Cayan D, Field CB, Frumhoff PC, Maurer EP, Miller NL, Moser SC, Schneider SH, Cahill KN, Cleland EE, Dale L, Drapek R, Hanemann RM, Kalkstein LS, Lenihan J, Lunch CK, Neilson RP, Sheridan SC, Verville JH (2004) Emissions pathways, climate change, and impacts on California. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101:12422–12427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnsen K, Samuelson L, Teskey R, McNulty S, Fox T (2001) Process models as tools in forestry research and management. For Sci 47:2–8Google Scholar
  16. Kobe RK, Pacala SW, Silander JA, Canham CD (1995) Juvenile tree survivorship as a component of shade tolerance. Ecol Appl 5:517–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Korner C, Asshoff R, Bignucolo O, Hattenschwiler S, Keel SG, Pelaez-Riedl S, Pepin S, Siegwolf RTW, Zotz G (2005) Carbon flux and growth in mature deciduous forest trees exposed to elevated CO2. Science 309:1360–1362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lasch P, Linder M, Erhard M, Suckow F, Wenzel A (2002) Regional impact assessment on forest structure and functions under climate change – the Brandenburg case study. For Ecol Manag 162:73–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lenihan JM, Drapek R, Bachelet D, Neilson RP (2003) Climate change effects on vegetation distribution, carbon, and fire in California. Ecol Appl 13:1667–1681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lenihan JM, Bachelet D, Drapek R, Neilson RP (2006) The response of vegetation distribution, ecosystem productivity, and fire in California to future climate scenarios simulated by the MC1 Dynamic Vegetation Model. Public Interest Energy Research, California Energy Commission. CEC-500-2005-191-SFGoogle Scholar
  21. Linder M (2000) Developing adaptive forest management strategies to cope with climate change. Tree Physiol 20:299–307Google Scholar
  22. Long SP, Ainsworth EA, Rogers A, Ort DR (2004) Rising atmospheric carbon dioxide: Plants face the future. Annual Review Plant Biology 55:591–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lonsdale D, Gibbs JN (1996) Effects of climate change on fungal diseases of trees. In: Frankland JC, Magan M, Gadd GM (eds) Fungi and environmental change: symposium of the British Mycological Society, March 1994, Cranfield, England, UK. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  24. Meehl GA, Washington WM, Arblaster JM, Hu AX (2004) Factors affecting climate sensitivity in global coupled models. J Climate 17:1584–1596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Norby RJ, DeLucia EH, Gielen B, Calfapietra C, Giardina CP, King JS, Ledford J, McCarthy HR, Moore DJP, Ceulemans R, De Angelis P, Finzi AC, Karnosky DF, Kubiske ME, Lukac M, Pregitzer KS, Scarascia-Mugnozza GE, Schlesinger WH, Oren R (2005) Forest response to elevated CO2 is conserved across a broad range of productivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:18052–18056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Olson CM, Helms JA (1996) Forest growth and stand structure at Blodgett Forest Research Station: 1933–95. In: Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final report to Congress, vol. III, chap. 16. Davis: University of California, Centers for Water and Wildland ResourcesGoogle Scholar
  27. Pacala SW, Canham CD, Saponara J, Silander JA, Kobe RK, Ribbens E (1996) Forest models defined by field measurements: Estimation, error analysis and dynamics. Ecol Monogr 66:1–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pedersen BS (1998) The role of stress in the mortality of midwestern oaks as indicated by growth prior to death. Ecology 79:79–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Royce EB, Barbour MG (2001a) Mediterranean climate effects. I. Conifer water use across a Sierra Nevada ecotone. Am J Bot 88:911–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Royce EB, Barbour MG (2001b) Mediterranean climate effects. II. Conifer growth phenology across a Sierra Nevada ecotone. Am J Bot 88:919–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Spelter H (2002) Conversion of board foot scaled logs to cubic meters in Washington State, 1970–1998. General Technical Report FPL-GTR-131. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WIGoogle Scholar
  32. Standiford R (2003) UCB Center for Forestry White Paper: The Forestry Program within the University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. http://nature.berkeley.edu/forestry/. Cited 10 October 2005
  33. Suarez ML, Ghermandi L, Kitzberger T (2004) Factors predisposing episodic drought-induced tree mortality in Nothofagus-site, climatic sensitivity and growth trends. J Ecol 92:954–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vogler DR, Gordon TR, Aegerter BJ, Kirkpatrick SC, Lunak GA, Stover P, Violett P (2004) First report of the pitch canker fungus (Fusarium circinatum) in the Sierra Nevada of California. Plant Dis 88(7):772Google Scholar
  35. Wensel LC, Turnblom EC (1998) Adjustment of estimated tree growth rates in northern California conifers for changes in precipitation levels. Can J For Res 28:1241–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wensel LC, Daugherty PJ, Meerschaer WJ (1986) CACTOS User’ Guide: the California conifer timber output simulator. Bulletin 1920. Division of Agricultural Sciences University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  37. Wittig VE, Bernacchi CJ, Zhu XG, Calfapietra C, Ceulemans R, Deangelis P, Gielen B, Miglietta F, Morgan PB, Long SP (2005) Gross primary production is stimulated for three Populus species grown under free-air CO2 enrichment from planting through canopy closure. Glob Chang Biol 11:644–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wyckoff PH, Clark JS (2000) Predicting tree mortality from diameter growth: A comparison of maximum likelihood and Bayesian approaches. Can J For Res 30:156–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yeh H-Y (1997) The relationship between tree diameter growth and climate for coniferous species in northern California. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  40. Yeh H-Y, Wensel LC (2000) The relationship between tree diameter growth and climate for coniferous species in northern California. Can J For Res 30:1463–1471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yeh H-Y, Wensel LC, Turnblom EC (2000) An objective approach for classifying precipitation patterns to study climatic effects on tree growth. For Ecol Manag 139:41–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • John J. Battles
    • 1
    • 2
    • 4
  • Timothy Robards
    • 1
    • 3
  • Adrian Das
    • 1
  • Kristen Waring
    • 2
  • J. Keith Gilless
    • 1
  • Gregory Biging
    • 1
  • Frieder Schurr
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and ManagementUC BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.Center for ForestryUC BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA
  3. 3.California Department of Forestry and Fire ProtectionSacramentoUSA
  4. 4.UC BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations