Advertisement

Ecosystems

pp 1–10 | Cite as

Plant Production Responses to Precipitation Differ Along an Elevation Gradient and Are Enhanced Under Extremes

  • Seth M. Munson
  • Erin L. Bunting
  • John B. Bradford
  • Bradley J. Butterfield
  • Jennifer R. Gremer
Article

Abstract

The sensitivity of plant production to precipitation underlies the functioning of ecosystems. Studies that relate long-term mean annual precipitation and production across multiple sites (spatial relationship) or examine interannual linkages within a site (temporal relationship) can reveal biophysical controls over ecosystem function but have limited ability to infer responses to extreme changes in precipitation that may become more common under climate change. To overcome limitations of using a single approach, we integrated satellite- and ground-based estimates of production with a standardized, multi-site precipitation manipulation experiment across a grassland elevation gradient in the southwestern USA. The responsiveness of production to changes in precipitation followed the order: temporal (0.06–0.13 g m−2 mm−1) < spatial (0.21 g m−2 mm−1) < experimental relationship (0.25–0.42 g m−2 mm−1), suggesting that spatial and temporal relationships determined with satellite- and ground-based estimates cannot be extrapolated to determine the effect of extreme events. A strong production response to differences in mean annual precipitation across sites reinforces a regional control of water availability. Interannual sensitivity to precipitation was strongest at the low elevation grasslands, and the high elevation mixed conifer meadow had a large reduction in production in a drought year. Extreme experimental drought strongly reduced production in low elevation grasslands, but water addition had mixed effects. High elevation meadows were insensitive to both extreme drought and water addition. Our results highlight the importance of accounting for extreme climate regimes and site-level factors when scaling climate change effects up to regional and global scales.

Keywords

biomass drought climate change grassland net primary production remote sensing southwestern USA 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the US Geological Survey National Climate Adaptation Science Center and the Ecosystems Mission Area. We thank Troy Wood, Stella Copeland, Austin Rueda, Kaitlyn Toledo, and Jonathan Paklaian for field assistance. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the US Government.

Supplementary material

10021_2018_296_MOESM1_ESM.docx (626 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 626 kb)

References

  1. Adler PB, Dalgleish HJ, Ellner SP. 2012. Forecasting plant community impacts of climate variability and change: when do competitive interactions matter? J Ecol 100:478–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Browning DM, Karl JW, Morin D, Richardson AD, Tweedie CE. 2017. Phenocams bridge the gap between field and satellite observations in an arid grassland ecosystem. Remote Sens 9:1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bunting EL, Munson SM, Villarreal ML. 2017. Climate legacy and lag effects on dryland plant communities in the southwestern U.S. Ecol Ind 74:216–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Butterfield BJ, Bradford JB, Munson SM, Gremer JR. 2017. Aridity increases below-ground niche breadth in grass communities. Plant Ecol 218:385–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dunne JA, Saleska SR, Fischer ML, Harte J. 2004. Integrating experimental and gradient methods in ecological climate change research. Ecology 85:904–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Estiarte M and others 2016. Few multiyear precipitation–reduction experiments find a shift in the productivity–precipitation relationship. Glob Change Biol 22:2570–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fay PA and others 2015. Grassland productivity limited by multiple nutrients. Nat Plants 1:15080.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Gaitán JJ and others 2014. Vegetation structure is as important as climate to explain ecosystem functioning across Patagonian rangelands. J Ecol 102:1419–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gherardi LA, Sala OE. 2013. Automated rainfall manipulation system: a reliable and inexpensive tool for ecologists. Ecosphere 4:18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoover DL, Duniway MC, Belnap J. 2015. Pulse-drought atop press-drought: unexpected plant responses and implications for dryland ecosytems. Oecologia 179:1211–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Huenneke LF, Clason D, Muldavin E. 2001. Spatial heterogeneity in Chihuahuan Desert vegetation: implications for sampling methods in semi-arid ecosystems. J Arid Environ 47:257–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Huxman TE and others 2004. Convergence across biomes to a common rain-use efficiency. Nature 429:651–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Knapp AK, Smith MD. 2001. Variation among biomes in temporal dynamics of aboveground primary production. Science 291:481–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Knapp AK, Carroll CJW, Denton EM, La Pierre KJ, Collins SL, Smith MD. 2015. Differential sensitivity to regional-scale drought in six central US grasslands. Oecologia 177:949–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Knapp AK, Ciais P, Smith MD. 2017. Reconciling inconsistencies in precipitation–production relationships: implications for climate change. New Phytol 214:41–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Lauenroth WK, Sala OE. 1992. Long-term forage production of North American shortgrass steppe. Ecol Appl 2:397–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Munson SM, Belnap J, Okin GS. 2011. Responses of wind erosion to climate-induced vegetation changes on the Colorado Plateau. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:3854–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Munson SM and others 2015. Long-term plant responses to climate are moderated by biophysical attributes in a North American desert. J Ecol 103:657–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Peters DPC, Yao J, Sala OE, Anderson JP. 2012. Directional climate change and potential reversal of desertification in arid and semiarid ecosystems. Glob Change Biol 18:151–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pettorelli N, Laurance WF, O’Brien TG, Wegmann M, Nagendra H, Turner W. 2014. Satellite remote sensing for applied ecologists: opportunities and challenges. J Appl Ecol 51:839–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Qi J, Chehbouni A, Huete AR, Kerr YH. 1994. Modified Soil Adjusted Vegetation Index (MSAVI). Remote Sens Environ 48:119–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. R Core Team. 2016. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. http://www.R-project.org.
  23. Sala OE, Lauenroth WK. 1982. Small rainfall events: an ecological role in semiarid regions. Oecologia 53:301–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Sala OE, Parton WJ, Joyce LA, Lauenroth WK. 1988. Primary production of the central grassland region of the United States. Ecology 69:40–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sala OE, Gherardi LA, Reichmann LG, Jobbágy E, Peters DPC. 2012. Legacies of precipitation fluctuations on primary production: theory and data synthesis. Philos Trans R Soc B 367:3135–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schwinning S, Ehleringer JR. 2001. Water use trade-offs and optimal adaptations to pulse-driven arid ecosystems. J Ecol 89:464–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Smith MD, Knapp AK, Collins SL. 2009. A framework for assessing ecosystem dynamics in response to chronic resource alterations influenced by global change. Ecology 90:3279–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Tilman D. 1988. Plant strategies and the dynamics and structure of plant communities. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Wilcox KR and others 2017. Asymmetric responses of primary productivity to precipitation extremes: a synthesis of grassland precipitation manipulation experiments. Glob Change Biol.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature (This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Seth M. Munson
    • 1
    • 2
  • Erin L. Bunting
    • 3
  • John B. Bradford
    • 1
  • Bradley J. Butterfield
    • 2
  • Jennifer R. Gremer
    • 4
  1. 1.Southwest Biological Science CenterU.S. Geological SurveyFlagstaffUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biological SciencesNorthern Arizona UniversityFlagstaffUSA
  3. 3.Department of Geography, Environment, and Spatial SciencesMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  4. 4.Department of Evolution and EcologyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations