Ecosystems

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 98–114 | Cite as

A Canopy Shift in Interior Alaskan Boreal Forests: Consequences for Above- and Belowground Carbon and Nitrogen Pools during Post-fire Succession

Article

Abstract

Global change models predict that high-latitude boreal forests will become increasingly susceptible to fire activity as climate warms, possibly causing a positive feedback to warming through fire-driven emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere. However, fire-climate feedbacks depend on forest regrowth and carbon (C) accumulation over the post-fire successional interval, which is influenced by nitrogen (N) availability. To improve our understanding of post-fire C and N accumulation patterns in boreal forests, we evaluated above- and belowground C and N pools within 70 stands throughout interior Alaska, a region predicted to undergo a shift in canopy dominance as fire severity increases. Stands represented gradients in age and successional trajectory, from black spruce (Picea mariana) self-replacement to species replacement by deciduous species of trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides) and Alaska paper birch (Betula neoalaskana). Stands undergoing deciduous trajectories stored proportionally more of their C and N in aboveground stemwood and had 5–7 times faster rates of aboveground net primary productivity of trees compared to stands undergoing a black spruce trajectory, which stored more of their C and N in the soil organic layer (SOL), a thick layer of mostly undecomposed mosses. Thus, as successional trajectories shift, total C and N pool sizes will remain relatively unchanged, but there will be a trade-off in pool location and a potential increase in C and N longevity due to decreased flammability and decomposition rates of deciduous stemwood. Despite often warmer, drier conditions in deciduous compared to black spruce stands, deciduous stemwood has a C:N around 10 times higher than the black spruce SOL and often remains standing for many years with reduced exposure to fungal decomposers. Thus, a fire-driven shift in successional trajectories could cause a negative feedback to climate warming because of increased pool longevity in deciduous trajectories.

Keywords

Climate warming Fire Carbon Nitrogen Succession Black spruce Trembling aspen Alaska paper birch Deciduous 

Supplementary material

10021_2015_9920_MOESM1_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 18 kb)

References

  1. Alexander HD, Mack MC, Goetz S, Beck PSA, Belshe EF. 2012. Implications of increased deciduous cover on stand structure and aboveground carbon pools of Alaskan boreal forests. Ecosphere 3:art45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balshi MS, McGuire AD, Duffy P, Flannigan M, Kicklighter DW, Melillo J. 2009. Vulnerability of carbon storage in North American boreal forests to wildfires during the 21st century. Glob Change Biol 15:1491–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boby LA, Schuur EA, Mack MC, Verbyla D, Johnstone JF. 2010. Quantifying fire severity, carbon, and nitrogen emissions in Alaska’s boreal forest. Ecol Appl 20:1633–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bond-Lamberty B, Peckham SD, Ahl DE, Gower ST. 2007. Fire as the dominant driver of central Canadian boreal forest carbon balance. Nature 450:89–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradshaw CJ, Warkentin IG, Sodhi NS. 2009. Urgent preservation of boreal carbon stocks and biodiversity. Trends Ecol Evolut 24:541–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chapin FS, Trainor SF, Huntington O, Lovecraft AL, Zavaleta E, Natcher DC, McGuire AD, Nelson JL, Ray L, Calef M et al. 2008. Increasing wildfire in Alaska’s boreal forest: pathways to potential solutions of a wicked problem. BioScience 58:531–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chapin FSIII, Hollingsworth T, Murray DF, Viereck LA, Walker MD. 2006a. Floristic diversity and vegetation distribution in the Alaskan boreal forest. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Chapin FSIII, Viereck LA, Adams P, Van Cleve K, Fastie CL, Ott RA, Mann D, Johnstone JF. 2006b. Successional processes in the Alaskan boreal forest. Oxford: Alaska’s changing boreal forest Oxford University Press. pp 100–20.Google Scholar
  9. Dyrness CT. 1982. Control of depth to permafrost and soil temperature by the forest floor in black spruce/feathermoss communities. US Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.Google Scholar
  10. Flannigan M, Stocks B, Turetsky M, Wotton M. 2009. Impacts of climate change on fire activity and fire management in the circumboreal forest. Glob Change Biol 15:549–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gower ST, Hunter A, Campbell J, Vogel J, Veldhuis H, Harden J, Trumbore S, Norman JM, Kucharik CJ et al. 2000. Nutrient dynamics of the southern and northern BOREAS boreal forests. Ecoscience 7:481–90.Google Scholar
  12. Harden JW, Mack M, Veldhuis H, Gower ST. 2002. Fire dynamics and implications for nitrogen cycling in boreal forests. J Geophys Res Atmos (1984–2012) 107:WFX-4.Google Scholar
  13. Harden JW, Trumbore SE, Stocks BJ, Hirsch A, Gower ST, O’neill KP, Kasischke ES. 2000. The role of fire in the boreal carbon budget. Glob Change Biol 6:174–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hinzman LD, Bettez ND, Bolton WR, Chapin FS, Dyurgerov MB, Fastie CL, Griffith B, Hollister RD, Hope A, Huntington HP et al. 2005. Evidence and implications of recent climate change in northern Alaska and other arctic regions. Clim Change 72:251–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hobbie SE. 1996. Temperature and plant species control over litter decomposition in Alaskan tundra. Ecol Monogr 66:503–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hobbie SE, Schimel JP, Trumbore SE, Randerson JR. 2000. Controls over carbon storage and turnover in high-latitude soils. Glob Change Biology 6:196–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hollingsworth TN, Walker MD, Chapin FSIII, Parsons AL. 2006. Scale-dependent environmental controls over species composition in Alaskan black spruce communities. Can J For Res 36:1781–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hulten E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and neighboring territories: a manual of the vascular plants. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Huntington HP, Goodstein E, Euskirchen E. 2012. Towards a tipping point in responding to change: rising costs, fewer options for Arctic and global societies. Ambio 41:66–74.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Jerabkova L, Prescott CE, Kishchuk BE. 2006. Nitrogen availability in soil and forest floor of contrasting types of boreal mixedwood forests. Can J For Res 36:112–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Johnstone JF, Chapin FSIII. 2006a. Effects of soil burn severity on post-fire tree recruitment in boreal forest. Ecosystems 9:14–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnstone JF, Chapin FSIII. 2006b. Fire interval effects on successional trajectory in boreal forests of northwest Canada. Ecosystems 9:268–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Johnstone JF, Kasischke ES. 2005. Stand-level effects of soil burn severity on postfire regeneration in a recently burned black spruce forest. Can J For Res 35:2151–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnstone JF, Chapin FS, Foote J, Kemmett S, Price K, Viereck L. 2004. Decadal observations of tree regeneration following fire in boreal forests. Can J For Res 34(2):267–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johnstone JF, Chapin FS, Hollingsworth TN, Mack MC, Romanovsky V, Turetsky M. 2010a. Fire, climate change, and forest resilience in interior Alaska. Can J For Res 40:1302–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Johnstone JF, Hollingsworth TN, Chapin FS, Mack MC. 2010b. Changes in fire regime break the legacy lock on successional trajectories in Alaskan boreal forest. Glob Change Biol 16:1281–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kasischke ES, Christensen Jr NL, Stocks BJ. 1995. Fire, global warming, and the carbon balance of boreal forests. Ecol Appl 5(2):437–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kasischke ES, Verbyla DL, Rupp TS, McGuire AD, Murphy KA, Jandt R, Barnes JL, Hoy EE, Duffy PA, Calef M et al. 2010. Alaska’s changing fire regime-implications for the vulnerability of its boreal forests. Can J For Res 40:1313–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kelly R, Chipman ML, Higuera PE, Stefanova I, Brubaker LB, Hu FS. 2013. Recent burning of boreal forests exceeds fire regime limits of the past 10,000 years. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:13055–60.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Légaré S, Paré D, Bergeron Y. 2004. The responses of black spruce growth to an increased proportion of aspen in mixed stands. Can J For Res 34:405–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Légaré S, Paré D, Bergeron Y. 2005. Influence of aspen on forest floor properties in black spruce-dominated stands. Plant Soil 275:207–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mack MC, Treseder KK, Manies KL, Harden JW, Schuur EA, Vogel JG, Randerson JT, Chapin FSIII. 2008. Recovery of aboveground plant biomass and productivity after fire in mesic and dry black spruce forests of interior Alaska. Ecosystems 11:209–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McGuire AD, Anderson LG, Christensen TR, Dallimore S, Guo L, Hayes DJ, Heimann M, Lorenson TD, Macdonald RW, Roulet N. 2009. Sensitivity of the carbon cycle in the Arctic to climate change. Ecol Monogr 79:523–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Natalia S, Lieffers VJ, Landhäusser SM. 2008. Effects of leaf litter on the growth of boreal feather mosses: implication for forest floor development. J Veg Sci 19:253–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Neff JC, Harden JW, Gleixner G. 2005. Fire effects on soil organic matter content, composition, and nutrients in boreal interior Alaska. Can J For Res 35:2178–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. O’Donnell JA, Romanovsky VE, Harden JW, McGuire AD. 2009. The effect of moisture content on the thermal conductivity of moss and organic soil horizons from black spruce ecosystems in interior Alaska. Soil Sci 174:646–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oechel WC, Van Cleve K. 1986. The role of bryophytes in nutrient cycling in the taiga. In: Van Cleve K, Chapin FS, Flanagan P, Viereck LA, Dyrness CT, Eds. Forest ecosystems in the Alaskan taiga. Berlin: Springer. p 121–37.Google Scholar
  38. Osterkamp TE, Romanovsky VE. 1999. Evidence for warming and thawing of discontinuous permafrost in Alaska. Permafr Periglac Process 10:17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pan Y, Birdsey RA, Fang J, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz WA, Phillips OL, Shvidenko A, Lewis SL, Canadell JG et al. 2011. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science 333:988–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Randerson JT, Liu H, Flanner MG, Chambers SD, Jin Y, Hess PG, Pfister G, Mack MC, Treseder KK, Welp LR et al. 2006. The impact of boreal forest fire on climate warming. Science 314:1130–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Rayner AD, Boddy L et al. 1988. Fungal decomposition of wood. Its biology and ecology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  42. Rhoades C, Oskarsson H, Binkley D, Stottlemyer B. 2001. Alder (Alnus crispa) effects on soils in ecosystems of the Agashashok River valley, northwest Alaska. Ecoscience 8:89–95.Google Scholar
  43. Romme WH, Everham EH, Frelich LE, Moritz MA, Sparks RE. 1998. Are large, infrequent disturbances qualitatively different from small, frequent disturbances? Ecosystems 1:524–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Slaughter CW, Viereck LA. 1986. Climatic characteristics of the taiga in interior Alaska. In: Van Cleve K, Chapin FS, Flanagan P, Viereck LA, Dyrness CT, Eds. Forest ecosystems in the Alaskan taiga. Berlin: Springer. p 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Soja AJ, Tchebakova NM, French NH, Flannigan MD, Shugart HH, Stocks BJ, Sukhinin AI, Parfenova EI, Chapin FSIII, Stackhouse PW Jr. 2007. Climate-induced boreal forest change: predictions versus current observations. Glob Planet Change 56:274–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Turetsky MR. 2003. The role of bryophytes in carbon and nitrogen cycling. Bryol 106:395–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Turetsky MR, Kane ES, Harden JW, Ottmar RD, Manies KL, Hoy E, Kasischke ES. 2011. Recent acceleration of biomass burning and carbon losses in Alaskan forests and peatlands. Nat Geosci 4:27–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Van Cleve K, Alexander V. 1981. Nitrogen cycling in tundra and boreal ecosystems. Ecol Bull 33:375–404.Google Scholar
  49. Van Cleve K, Oliver L, Schlentner R, Viereck LA, Dyrness CT. 1983a. Productivity and nutrient cycling in taiga forest ecosystems. Can J For Res 13(5):747–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Van Cleve K, Dyrness CT, Viereck LA, Fox J, Chapin FS, Oechel W. 1983b. Taiga ecosystems in interior Alaska. Bioscience 33(1):39–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Viereck LA, Dyrness CT, Van Cleve K, Foote MJ. 1983. Vegetation, soils, and forest productivity in selected forest types in interior Alaska. Can J For Res 13:703–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weber MG, Flannigan MD. 1997. Canadian boreal forest ecosystem structure and function in a changing climate: impact on fire regimes. Environ Rev 5(3–4):145–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wurtz TL. 1995. Understory alder in three boreal forests of Alaska: local distribution and effects on soil fertility. Can J For Res 25:987–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhang D, Hui D, Luo Y, Zhou G. 2008. Rates of litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems: global patterns and controlling factors. J Plant Ecol 1:85–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ForestryForest and Wildlife Research CenterMississippi State UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Center for Ecosystem Science and SocietyNorthern Arizona UniversityFlagstaffUSA

Personalised recommendations