Climatic Change

, Volume 114, Issue 2, pp 357–377 | Cite as

The potential transient dynamics of forests in New England under historical and projected future climate change

Article

Abstract

Projections of vegetation distribution that incorporate the transient responses of vegetation to climate change are likely to be more efficacious than those that assume an equilibrium between climate and vegetation. We examine the non-equilibrium dynamics of a temperate forest region under historic and projected future climate change using the dynamic ecosystem model LPJ-GUESS. We parameterized LPJ-GUESS for the New England region of the United Sates utilizing eight forest cover types that comprise the regionally dominant species. We developed a set of climate data at a monthly-step and a 30-arc second spatial resolution to run the model. These datasets consist of past climate observations for the period 1901–2006 and three general circulation model projections for the period 2007–2099. Our baseline (1971–2000) simulation reproduces the distribution of forest types in our study region as compared to the National Land Cover Data 2001 (Kappa statistic = 0.54). Under historic and nine future climate change scenarios, maple-beech-basswood, oaks and aspen-birch were modeled to move upslope at an estimated rate of 0.2, 0.3 and 0.5 m yr−1 from 1901 to 2006, and continued this trend at an accelerated rate of around 0.5, 0.9 and 1.7 m yr−1 from 2007 to 2099. Spruce-fir and white pine-cedar were modeled to contract to mountain ranges and cooler regions of our study region under projected future climate change scenarios. By the end of the 21st century, 60% of New England is projected to be dominated by oaks relative to 21% at the beginning of the 21st century, while northern New England is modeled to be dominated by aspen-birch. In mid and central New England, maple-beech-basswood, yellow birch-elm and hickories co-occur and form novel species associations. In addition to warming-induced northward and upslope shifts, climate change causes more complex changes in our simulations, such as reversed conversions between forest types that currently share similar bioclimatic ranges. These results underline the importance of considering community interactions and transient dynamics in modeling studies of climate change impacts on forest ecosystems.

Supplementary material

10584_2012_404_MOESM1_ESM.doc (227 kb)
ESM 1(DOC 227 kb)

References

  1. 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 165:351–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bachelet D, Neilson RP, Lenihan JM, Drapek RJ (2001) Climate change effects on vegetation distribution and carbon budget in the United States. Ecosystems 4:164–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beckage B, Osborne B, Gavin DG, Pucko C, Siccama T, Perkins T (2008) A rapid upward shift of a forest ecotone during 40 years of warming in the Green Mountains of Vermont. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105:4197–4202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beckage B, Gross L, Kauffman S (2011) The limits to prediction in ecological systems. Ecosphere. In press.Google Scholar
  5. Cleveland WS (1979) Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. J Am Stat Assoc 74:829–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20:37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cole CT, Anderson JE, Lindroth RL, Waller DM (2010) Rising concentrations of atmospheric CO2 have increased growth in natural stands of quaking aspen. Glob Change Biol 10:2186–2197Google Scholar
  8. Daly C, Taylor GH, Gibson WP, Parzybok TW, Johnson GL, Pasteris P (2000) High-quality spatial climate data sets for the United States and beyond. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng 43:1957–1962Google Scholar
  9. Daly C, Gibson WP, Taylor GH, Gibson WP, Parzybok TW, Johnson GL, Pasteris P (2002) A knowledge-based approach to the statistical mapping of climate. Climate Res 22:99–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis MB (1989) Lags in vegetation response to greenhouse warming. Climatic Change 15:75–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Davis MB, Shaw RG (2001) Range shifts and adaptive responses to quaternary climate change. Science 292:673–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans AM, Perschel R (2009) A review of forestry mitigation and adaptation strategies in the Northeast US. Climatic Change 96:167–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. FAO (1991) The digitized soil map of the world (release 1.0). Vol. 67/1, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
  14. Farnsworth EJ, Ogurcak DE (2006) Biogeography and decline of rare plants in New England: historical evidence and contemporary monitoring. Ecol Appl 16:1327–1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Farr TG, Kobrick M (2000) Shuttle Radar Topography Mission produces a wealth of data. Am Geophys Union Eos 81:583–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foster DR, Motzkin G, Slater B (1998) Land-use history as long-term broad-scale disturbance: regional forest dynamics in central New England. Ecosystems 1:96–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Foster DR, Clayden S, Orwig DA, Hall B, Barry S (2002) Oak, chestnut and fire: climatic and cultural controls of long-term forest dynamics in New England, USA. J Biogeogr 29:1359–1379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Foster DR, Oswald WW, Faison EK, Doughty ED, Hansen BCS (2006) A climatic driver for abrupt mid-Holocene vegetation dynamics and the hemlock decline in New England. Ecology 87:2959–2966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fuller TL, Foster DR, McLachlan JS, Drake N (1998) Impact of human activity on regional forest composition and dynamics in central New England. Ecosystems 1:76–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gordon C, Cooper C, Senior CA, Banks HT, Gregory JM, Johns TC, Mitchell JFB, Wood RA (2000) The simulation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports in a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments. Clim Dynam 16:147–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hagen-Zanker A, Straatman B, Uljee I (2005) Further developments of a fuzzy set map comparison approach. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 19:769–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hall B, Motzkin G, Foster DR, Syfert M, Burk J (2002) Three hundred years of forest and land-use change in Massachusetts, USA. J Biogeogr 29:1319–1335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hickler T, Smith B, Sykes MT, Davis MB, Sugita S, Walker K (2004) Using a generalized vegetation model to simulate vegetation dynamics in northeastern USA. Ecology 85:519–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hickler T, Smith B, Prentice IC, Mjofors K, Miller P, Arneth A, Sykes MT (2008) CO2 fertilization in temperate FACE experiments not representative of boreal and tropical forests. Glob Change Biol 14:1531–1542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hooker TD, Compton JE (2003) Forest ecosystem carbon and nitrogen accumulation during the first century after agricultural abandonment. Ecol App 13:299–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. IPCC (2007) Summary for policymakers. In: Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 7–22Google Scholar
  27. Iverson LR, Prasad AM (2001) Potential changes in tree species richness and forest community types following climate change. Ecosystems 4:186–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jay RM, Adam M, Ronald PN, Michael G (2002) Estimated migration rates under scenarios of global climate change. J Biogeogr 29:835–849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jungclaus JH, Botzet M, Haak H, Keenlyside N, Luo JJ, Latif M, Marotzke J, Mikolajewicz U, Roeckner E (2005) Ocean circulation and tropical variability in the AOGCM ECHAM5/MPI-OM. J Climate 19:3952–3972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kelly PM, White JM (1993) Preprocessing remotely sensed data for efficient analysis and classification, applications of artificial intelligence 1993: knowledge-based systems in aerospace and industry. Proc SPIE 1993:24–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kim SJ, Flato GM, Boer GJ, Boer GJ (2002) A coupled climate model simulation of the Last Glacial Maximum, Part 1: transient multi-decadal response. Clim Dynam 19:515–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kim SJ, Flato GM, Boer GJ (2003) A coupled climate model simulation of the Last Glacial Maximum, Part 2: approach to equilibrium. Clim Dynam 20:635–661Google Scholar
  33. Koca D, Smith B, Sykes MT (2006) Modelling regional climate change effects on potential natural ecosystems in Sweden. Climatic Change 78:381–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) Application of hierarchical Kappa-type statistics in assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics 33:363–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McKenny DW, Pedlar JH, Lawrence K, Campbell K, Hutchinson MF (2007) Potential impacts of climate change on the distribution of North American trees. BioScience 57:939–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McLachlan JS, Clark JS, Manos PS (2005) Molecular indicators of tree migration capacity under rapid climate change. Ecology 86:2088–2098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mitchell TD, Jones PD (2005) An improved method of constructing a database of monthly climate observations and associated high-resolution grids. Int J Climatol 25:693–712Google Scholar
  38. Monserud RA, Leemans R (1992) Comparing global vegetation maps with the Kappa statistic. Ecol Model 62:275–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Morales P, Sykes MT, Prentice IC et al (2005) Comparing and evaluating process-based ecosystem model predictions of carbon and water fluxes in major European forest biomes. Glob Change Biol 11:2211–2233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oswald WW, Foster DR, Dought ED, Faison EK (2009) A record of Lateglacial and early Holocene environmental and ecological change from southwestern Connecticut, USA. J Quaternary Sci 24:553–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Parmesan C, Yohe G (2003) A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature 421:37–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Parshall T, Foster DR, Faison E, Macdonald D, Hansen BCS (2003) Long-term history of vegetation and fire in pitch pine-oak forests on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Ecology 84:736–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pope V, Gallani ML, Rowntree PR, Stratton RA (2000) The impact of new physical parameterizations in the Hadley Centre climate model: HadAM3. Clim Dynam 16:123–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Prentice IC, Solomon AM (1990) Vegetation models and global change. In: Bradley RS (ed) Global changes of the past. UCAR/Office for Interdisciplinary Earth Studies, Boulder, pp 365–83Google Scholar
  45. Rosen PA, Hensley S, Joughin IR, Li FK, Madsen SN, Rodriguez E, Goldstein RM (2000) Synthetic aperture radar interferometry. Proc IEEE 88:333–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schlesinger ME, Malyshev S (2001) Changes in near-surface temperature and sea level for the Post-SRES CO2-stabilization scenarios. Integr Assess 2:95–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shuman B, Newby P, Huang Y, Thompson WEBB III (2004) Evidence for the close climatic control of New England vegetation history. Ecology 85:1297–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sitch S, Smith B, Prentice IC et al (2003) Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ Dynamic Global Vegetation Model. Glob Change Biol 9:161–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Smith B, Prentice IC, Sykes MT (2001) Representation of vegetation dynamics in the modeling of terrestrial ecosystems: comparing two contrasting approaches within European climate space. Global Ecol Biogeo 10:621–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tang G, Bartlein PJ (2008) Simulating the climatic effects on vegetation: approaches, issues and challenges. Prog Phys Geog 32:543–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tang G, Beckage B (2010) Projecting the distribution of forests in New England in response to climate change. Divers Distrib 16:144–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tang G, Shafer SL, Bartlein PJ, Holman (2009) Effects of experimental protocol on global vegetation model accuracy: A comparison of simulated and observed vegetation patterns for Asia. Ecol Model 220:1481–1491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tang G, Beckage B, Smith B, Miller PA (2010) Estimating potential forest NPP, biomass and their climatic sensitivity in New England using a regional dynamic ecosystem model. Ecosphere 1:1–20 (Article 18)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vogelmann JE, Sohl T, Campbell PV, Shaw DM (1998a) Regional land cover characterization using landsat thematic mapper data and ancillary data sources. Environ Monit Assess 51:415–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vogelmann JE, Sohl T, Howard SM (1998b) Regional characterization of land cover using multiple sources of data. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 64:45–47Google Scholar
  56. Withington JM, Reich PB, Oleksyn J, Eissenstat DM (2006) Comparisons of structure and life span in roots and leaves among temperate trees. Ecol Monogr 76:381–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Woodward FI, Beerling DJ (1997) The dynamics of vegetation change: health warnings for equilibrium ‘dodo’ models. Global Ecol Biogeogr 6:413–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Woodward FI, Lomas MR (2004) Vegetation dynamics—simulating responses to climatic change. Biol Rev 79:643–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wramneby A, Smith B, Zaehle S, Sykes MT (2008) Parameter uncertainties in the modeling of vegetation dynamics—Effects of on tree community structure and ecosystem functioning in European forest biomes. Ecol Model 216:277–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant BiologyUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Earth and Ecosystem Sciences, Geobiosphere Sciences CentreLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations