Advertisement

Landscape Ecology

, Volume 31, Issue 9, pp 2097–2114 | Cite as

Landscape-scale characteristics of forest tornado damage in mountainous terrain

  • Jeffery B. CannonEmail author
  • Jeffrey Hepinstall-Cymerman
  • Christopher M. Godfrey
  • Chris J. Peterson
Research Article
First Online:

Abstract

Context

Landscape patterns created by natural disturbance such as windstorms can affect forest regeneration, carbon cycling, and other ecological processes.

Objectives

We develop a method for remotely measuring tornado damage severity and describe landscape-scale patterns of tornado damage. We examine the extent and distribution of damage severity and gaps created by tornadoes, and examine how topographic variation can influence tornado damage severity.

Methods

Focusing on two April 2011 tornadoes that struck the Chattahoochee National Forest (CNF) in Georgia and the Great Smoky Mountains (GSM) in Tennessee, we used supervised classification of aerial photographs to map damage severity. We report the extent and distribution of damage severity from each track and characterize patterns of damage using FragStats. Using topographic overlays, we test hypotheses regarding how physiographic features such as valleys and ridges affect tornado damage severity.

Results

Tornado damage severity estimates were significantly correlated with ground-truth measurements. The 64-km CNF track damaged 1712 ha (>25 % severity), while the 26-km GSM track damaged 1407 ha. Tornado damage severity was extremely variable and frequency of gap sizes drastically decreased with size, with many small gaps and few very large gaps, consistent with other types of wind damage. Damage severity declined as tornadoes ascended ridges and increased as they descended ridges. This effect was more consistent on shallow slopes relative to steeper slopes.

Conclusions

This study outlines an objective methodology for remotely characterizing tornado damage severity. The results from this study fill an important gap in ecological understanding of the spatial components of the forest tornado disturbance regime.

Keywords

Blowdown Disturbance Landscape pattern Remote sensing Topography Tornado damage 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Paul Super, Tom Troutman, and the staff of Great Smoky Mountains National Park for their support and cooperation and all who participated in fieldwork including Michael Bailey, Meredith Barrett, Patrick Johnson, Sophia Kim, Uma Nagendra, Nick Richwagen, Luke Snyder, and Andrei Stanescu. We also thank Daniel Markewitz, Richard Lankau, Joseph O’Brien, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on the manuscript. This study was made possible by grants from the National Park Service’s Climate Change Youth Initiative and the University of Georgia, Department of Plant Biology, and by grants from the National Science Foundation in Ecology (DEB1143511) and Meteorology (AGS1141926).

Supplementary material

10980_2016_384_MOESM1_ESM.docx (914 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 915 kb)

References

  1. Beatty SW (1984) Influence of microtopography and canopy species on spatial patterns of forest understory plants. Ecology 65:1406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck V, Dotzek N (2010) Reconstruction of near-surface tornado wind fields from forest damage. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 49:1517–1537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bluestein HB (2000) A tornadic supercell over elevated, complex terrain: the divide, Colorado, storm of 12 July 1996. Mon Weather Rev 128:795–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boose E, Foster D, Fluet M (1994) Hurricane impacts to tropical and temperate forest landscapes. Ecol Monogr 64:369–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brooks H (2004) On the relationship of tornado path length and width to intensity. Weather Forecast 19:310–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Busing RT, White RD, Harmon ME, White PS (2009) Hurricane disturbance in a temperate deciduous forest: patch dynamics, tree mortality, and coarse woody detritus. Plant Ecol 201:351–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Canham CD, Loucks OL (1984) Catastrophic windthrow in the presettlement forests of Wisconsin. Ecology 65:803–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Canham CD, Papaik MJ, Latty EF (2001) Interspecific variation in susceptibility to windthrow as a function of tree size and storm severity for northern temperate tree species. Can J For Res 31:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cannon JB, Barrett ME, Peterson CJ (2015) The effect of species, size, failure mode, and fire-scarring on tree stability. For Ecol Manag 356:196–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chambers JQ, Fisher JI, Zeng H, Chapman EL, Baker DB, Hurtt GC (2007) Hurricane Katrina’s carbon footprint. Science 318:2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Congalton RG, Green K (2009) Assessing the accuracy of remotely sensed data—principles and practices, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Taylor Francis Group, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  12. Dahal D, Liu S, Oeding J (2014) The carbon cycle and hurricanes in the United States between 1900 and 2011. Sci Rep 4:5197CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Dale VH, Joyce LA, McNulty S, Neilson RP, Ayres MP, Flannigan MD (2001) Climate change and forest disturbances. Bioscience 51:723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Doswell CA, Burgess DW (1988) On some issues of United States tornado climatology. Mon Weather Rev 116:495–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dotzek N, Schultz DM, Markowski PM (2011) A numerical study of the effects of orography on supercells. Atmos Res 100:457–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ESRI (2011) ArcGIS Desktop Release 10. Environmental Systems Research InstituteGoogle Scholar
  17. Evans AM, Camp AE, Tyrrell ML, Riely CC (2007) Biotic and abiotic influences on wind disturbance in forests of NW Pennsylvania, USA. For Ecol Manag 245:44–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Forbes GS (1998) Topographic influences on tornadoes in Pennsylvania. Preprints, 19th conference on severe local storms. Minneapolois, MN, American Meteorological Society, 269–272Google Scholar
  19. Foster D, Boose E (1992) Patterns of forest damage resulting from catastrophic wind in central New England, USA. J Ecol 80:79–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Foster DR, Knight DH, Franklin JF (1998) Landscape patterns and legacies resulting from large, infrequent forest disturbances. Ecosystems 1:497–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Godfrey CM, Peterson CJ (2014) Estimating enhanced Fujita scale levels based on forest damage severity. Preprints, 24th Conference on severe local storms: the current state of the science and understanding impacts. Atlanta, GA, American Meteorological Society, P832Google Scholar
  22. Gray AN, Spies TA (1996) Gap size, within-gap position and canopy structure effects on conifer seedling establishment. J Ecol 84:635–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Holland AP, Riordan AJ, Franklin EC (2006) A simple model for simulating tornado damage in forests. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 45:1597–1611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Krueger L, Peterson C (2006) Effects of white-tailed deer on Tsuga canadensis regeneration: evidence of microsites as refugia from browsing. Am Midl Nat 156:353–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lewellen DC (2012) Effects of topography on tornado dynamics: a simulation study. Preprints, 26th conference on severe local storms. Nashville, TN, USA, American Meterological Society, 4B.1Google Scholar
  26. Li H, Reynolds JF (1994) A simulation experiment to quantify spatial heterogeneity in categorical maps. Ecology 75:2446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lindemann J, Baker W (2001) Attributes of blowdown patches from a severe wind event in the Southern Rocky Mountains, USA. Landscape Ecol 16:313–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lindemann JD, Baker WL (2002) Using GIS to analyse a severe forest blowdown in the Southern Rocky Mountains. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 16:377–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lorimer CG (1980) Age structure and disturbance history of a southern Appalachian virgin forest. Ecology 61:1169–1184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lyza AW, Knupp K (2014) An observational analysis of potential terrain influences on tornado behavior. In: 27th Conference on severe local storms. American Meteorolgoical Society, Madison, WI. 11A.1AGoogle Scholar
  31. Matlack GR, Gleeson SK, Good RE (1993) Treefall in a mixed oak-pine coastal plain forest: immediate and historical causation. Ecology 74:1559–1566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Ene E (2012) FRAGSTATS v4: Spatial pattern program for categorical and continuous maps. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Available at http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html
  33. McNab WH, Greenberg CH, Berg EC (2004) Landscape distribution and characteristics of large hurricane-related canopy gaps in a southern Appalachian watershed. For Ecol Manag 196:435–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Millikin CS, Bowden RD (1996) Soil respiration in pits and mounds following an experimental forest blowdown. Soil Sci Soc Am J 60:1951–1953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nagendra UJ, Peterson CJ (2015) Plant-soil feedbacks differ in intact and tornado-damaged areas of the southern Appalachian mountains, USA. Plant Soil 4:1–14Google Scholar
  36. Negrón-Juárez R, Baker DB, Chambers JQ, Hurtt GC, Goosem S (2014) Multi-scale sensitivity of Landsat and MODIS to forest disturbance associated with tropical cyclones. Remote Sens Environ 140:679–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. NOAA (2011) Service Assessment: the historic tornadoes of April 2011. Available at http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/assessments/pdfs/historic_tornadoes.pdf
  38. Nowacki G, Kramer M (1998) The effects of wind disturbance on temperate rain forest structure and dynamics of southeast AlaskaGoogle Scholar
  39. Peterson CJ (2000) Catastrophic wind damage to North American forests and the potential impact of climate change. Sci Total Environ 262:287–311CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Peterson CJ, Godfrey CM (2014) Side-by-side tree and house damage in the May 2013 Moore, OK EF-5 tornado: lessons for the enhanced Fujita scale. Preprints, 24th Conference on Severe Local Storms, Atlanta, GA, American Meteorological Society, P831Google Scholar
  41. Peterson CJ, Pickett STA (1995) Forest reorganization: a case study in an old-growth forest catastrophic blowdown. Ecology 76:763–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peterson CJ, Krueger LM, Royo AA, Stark S, Carson WP (2013) Disturbance size and severity covary in small and mid-size wind disturbances in Pennsylvania northern hardwoods forests. For Ecol Manag 302:273–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pickett STA, White PS (1985) The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, Orlando, pp 3–13Google Scholar
  44. Rebertus A, Meier A (2001) Blowdown dynamics in oak-hickory forests of the Missouri Ozarks. J Torrey Bot Soc 128:362–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Runkle JR (1982) Patterns of disturbance in some old-growth mesic forests of eastern North America. Ecology 63:1533–1546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schnitzer SA, Carson WP (2001) Treefall gaps and the maintenance of species diversity in a tropical forest. Ecology 82:913–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Storm Prediction Center (2012) The online tornado FAQ. In: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. http://www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/. Accessed 26 Nov 2012
  48. Turner M, Romme W, Gardner R (1993) A revised concept of landscape equilibrium: disturbance and stability on scaled landscapes. Landscape Ecol 8:213–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Turner MG, Hargrove WW, Gardner RH, Romme WH (1994) Effects of fire on landscape heterogeneity in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. J Veg Sci 5:731–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Turner MG, Romme WH, Tinker DB (2003) Surprises and lessons from the 1988 Yellowstone fires. Front Ecol Environ 1:351–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ulanova NG (2000) The effects of windthrow on forests at different spatial scales: a review. For Ecol Manag 135:155–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. U.S. Geological Survey (2015) The National Map: 3D elevation program. http://viewer.nationalmap.gov
  53. Vaillancourt M-A, De Grandpré L, Gauthier S, Kneeshaw D, Drapeau P, Bergeron Y (2009) How can natural disturbance be a guide for forest ecosystem management? In: Gauthier S, Vaillancourt M-A, Leduc A, De Grandpré L, Kneeshaw D, Morin H, Drapeau P, Bergeron Y (eds) Ecosysteme management in the boreal forest. Presses de l’Université du Québec, Montreal, pp 39–55Google Scholar
  54. Verbout SM, Brooks HE, Leslie LM, Schultz DM (2006) Evolution of the U.S. tornado database: 1954–2003. Weather Forecast 21:86–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Waldron K, Ruel J (2014) Comparisons of spatial patterns between windthrow and logging at two spatial scales. Can J For Res 749:740–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Webb SL (1989) Contrasting windstorm consequences in two forests, Itasca State Park, Minnesota. Ecology 70:1167–1180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. White PS, Jentsch A (2001) The search for generality in studies of disturbance and ecosystem dynamics. Ecosystems 62:399–450Google Scholar
  58. Wilkinson DW, Crosby MK (2010) Rapid assessment of forest damage from tornadoes in Mississippi. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 76:1298–1301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Xi W, Peet RK, Urban DL (2008) Changes in forest structure, species diversity and spatial pattern following hurricane disturbance in a Piedmont North Carolina forest, USA. J Plant Ecol 1:43–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Yuan M, Dickens-Micozzi M, Magsig MA (2002) Analysis of tornado damage tracks from the 3 May tornado outbreak using multispectral satellite imagery. Weather Forecast 17:17CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffery B. Cannon
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Jeffrey Hepinstall-Cymerman
    • 3
  • Christopher M. Godfrey
    • 4
  • Chris J. Peterson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Plant BiologyUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.Colorado Forest Restoration InstituteColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA
  3. 3.Warnell School of Forestry and Natural ResourcesUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  4. 4.Department of Atmospheric SciencesUniversity of North Carolina at AshevilleAshevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options