Landscape Ecology

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 383–400 | Cite as

A frame-based spatially explicit model of subarctic vegetation response to climatic change: comparison with a point model

  • T. Scott Rupp
  • Anthony M. Starfield
  • F. Stuart ChapinIII


An important challenge in global-change research is to simulate short-term transient changes in climate, disturbance regime, and recruitment that drive long-term vegetation distributions. Spatial features (e.g., topographic barriers) and processes, including disturbance propagation and seed dispersal, largely control these short-term transient changes. Here we present a frame-based spatially explicit model (ALFRESCO) that simulates landscape-level response of vegetation to transient changes in climate and explicitly represents the spatial processes of disturbance propagation and seed dispersal. The spatial model and the point model from which it was developed showed similar results in some cases, but diverged in situations where interactions among neighboring cells (fire spread and seed dispersal) were crucial. Topographic barriers had little influence on fire size in low-flammability vegetation types, but reduced the average fire size and increased the number of fires in highly flammable vegetation (dry grassland). Large fires were more common in landscapes with large contiguous patches of two vegetation types while a more heterogeneous vegetation distribution increased fires in the less flammable vegetation type. When climate was held constant for thousands of years on a hypothetical landscape with the same initial vegetation, the spatial and point models produced identical results for some climates (cold, warm, and hot mesic), but produced markedly different results at current climate and when much drier conditions were imposed under a hot climate. Spruce migration into upland tundra was slowed or prevented by topographic barriers, depending on the size of the corridor. We suggest that frame-based, spatially explicit models of vegetation response to climate change are a useful tool to investigate both short- and long-term transients in vegetation at the regional scale. We also suggest that it is difficult to anticipate when non-spatial models will be reliable and when spatially explicit models are essential. ALFRESCO provides an important link between models of landscape-level vegetation dynamics and larger spatio-temporal models of global climate change.

boreal forest climatic change explicit fire insects landscape dynamics model spatially subarctic transient dynamics treeline 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alaska Fire Service. 1992. 1992 fire statistics and season summary. Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Dept. of Interior, Fairbanks, AK.Google Scholar
  2. Albini, F.A. 1976. Computer-based models of wildland fire behavior: a user's manual. U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Forestry and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, P.M. 1988. Late Quaternary pollen records from the Noatak and Kobuk River drainages, northwestern Alaska. Quat. Res. 29: 263–276.Google Scholar
  4. Anonymous. 1994. Alaska land characteristics data set–interim land cover classification. Eros Data Center and Eros Alaska Field Office, National Mapping Division, U.S. Geological Survey, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Antonovski, M.Ya., Ter-mikaelian, M.T. and Furyaev, V.V. 1992. A spatial model of long-term forest fire dynamics and its applications to forests in western Siberia. pp. 373–403. In A systems analysis of the global boreal forest. Edited by H.H. Shugart, R. Leemans and G.B. Bonan. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  6. Baker, W.L. 1992. Effects of settlement and fire suppression on landscape structure. Ecology 73: 1879–1887.Google Scholar
  7. Baker, W.L. 1993. Spatially heterogeneous multi-scale response of landscapes to fire suppression. Oikos 66: 66–71.Google Scholar
  8. Baker, W.L., Egbert, S.L. and Frazier, G.F. 1991. A spatial model for studying the effects of climatic change on the structure of landscapes subject to large disturbances. Ecol. Modelling 56: 109–125.Google Scholar
  9. Bliss, L.C. and Matveyeva, N.V. 1992. Circumpolar arctic vegetation. In Arctic ecosystems in a changing climate: an ecophysiological perspective. pp. 58–89. Edited by F.S. Chapin, III, R.L. Jefferies, J.F. Reynolds, G.R. Shaver and J. Svoboda. Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA.Google Scholar
  10. Bonan, G.B. 1990. Carbon and nitrogen cycling in North American boreal forests. II. Biogeographic patterns. Can. J. Forest Res. 20: 1077–1088.Google Scholar
  11. Bonan, G. B., Pollard, D. and Thompson, S.L. 1992. Effects of boreal forest vegetation on global climate. Nature 359: 716–718.Google Scholar
  12. Bonan, G.B., Chapin, F.S. III and Thompson, S.L. 1995. Boreal forest and tundra ecosystems as components of the climate system. Climatic Change 29: 145–167.Google Scholar
  13. Brubaker, L.B., Garfinkel, H.L. and Edwards, M.E. 1983. A Late-Wisconsin and Holocene vegetation history from the central Brooks Range: implications for Alaskan paleoecology. Quat. Res. 20: 194–214.Google Scholar
  14. Cattle, H. and Crossley, J. 1995. Modelling arctic climate change. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London A352: 201–213.Google Scholar
  15. Chapin, F.S., III and Starfield, A.M. 1997. Time lags and novel ecosystems in response to transient climatic change in arctic Alaska. Climatic Change 35: 449–461.Google Scholar
  16. Chrosciewicz, Z. 1986. Foliar heat content variations in four coniferous tree species of central Alberta. Can. J. Forest Res. 16: 152–157.Google Scholar
  17. Clark, J.S. 1988. Effect of climate change on fire regimes in northwestern Minnesota. Nature 334: 233–235.Google Scholar
  18. Clark, J.S. 1991. Disturbance and tree life history on the shifting mosaic landscape. Ecology 72: 1102–1118.Google Scholar
  19. Clark, J.S. 1996. Testing disturbance theory with long-term data: alternative life-history solutions to the distribution of events. Am. Nat. 148: 976–996.Google Scholar
  20. Clark, J.S., Royall, P.D. and Chumbley, C. 1996. The role of fire during climate change in an eastern deciduous forest at Devil's Bathtub, New York. Ecology 77: 2148–2166.Google Scholar
  21. Clark, J.S., Macklin, E. and Wood, L. 1998a. Stages and spatial scales of recruitment limitation in southern Appalachian forests. Ecol. Monog. 68: 213–235.Google Scholar
  22. Clark, J.S., Silman, M., Kern, R., Macklin, E. and HilleRisLambers, J. 1998b. Seed dispersal near and far: patterns across temperate and tropical forests. Ecology (in press).Google Scholar
  23. Cramer, W.P. and Leemans, R. 1993. Assessing impacts of climate change on vegetation using climate classification systems. In Vegetation dynamics and global change. pp. 190–217 Edited by A.M. Solomon and H.H. Shugart. Chapman and Hall, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  24. Dale, V.H. 1997. The relationship between land-use change and climate change. Ecol. Appl. 7: 753–769.Google Scholar
  25. Davis, M.B. 1981. Quaternary history and the stability of forest communities. In Forest succession: concepts and applications. pp. 132–153. Edited by D.C. West, H.H. Shugart and D.B. Botkin. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  26. Davis, M.B. 1983. Quaternary history of deciduous forests of eastern North America and Europe. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gardens 70: 550–563.Google Scholar
  27. Davis, M.B. 1986. Climatic instability, time lags, and community disequilibrium. In Community Ecology. pp. 269–284. Edited by J. Diamond and T.J. Case. Harper and Row, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  28. Davis, M.B. and Botkin, D.B. 1985. Sensitivity of cool-temperate forests and their fossil pollen record to rapid temperature change. Quat. Res. 23: 327–340.Google Scholar
  29. Edwards, M.E. and Armbruster, W.S. 1989. A tundra-steppe transition on Kathul Mountain, Alaska, USA. Arctic Alpine Res. 21: 296–304.Google Scholar
  30. Fastie, C.L. 1995. Causes and ecosystem consequences of multiple pathways of primary succession at Glacier Bay, Alaska. Ecology 76: 1899–1916.Google Scholar
  31. Finney, M.A. 1998. FARSITE: Fire area simulator–model development and evaluation. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Research Paper RMRS-RP-4.Google Scholar
  32. Flannigan, M.D. and Harrington, J.B. 1988. A study of the relation of meteorological variables to monthly provincial area burned by wildfire in Canada (1935–80). J. Appl Meteor. 27: 441–452.Google Scholar
  33. Flannigan, M.D.F. and Van Wagner, C.E. 1991. Climate change and wildfire in Canada. Can? J. Forest Res. 21: 66–72.Google Scholar
  34. Foley, J.A., Kutzbach, J.E., Coe, M.T. and Levis, S. 1994. Feedbacks between climate and boreal forests during the Holocene epoch. Nature 371: 52–54.Google Scholar
  35. Gardner, R.H., Hargrove, W.W., Turner, M.G. and Romme, W.H. 1996. Global change, disturbances and landscape dynamics. In Global change and terrestrial ecosystems. pp. 149–172. Edited by B. Walker and W. Steffen. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  36. Green, D.G. 1989. Simulated effects of fire, dispersal and spatial pattern on competition within forest mosaics. Vegetatio 82: 139–153.Google Scholar
  37. Greene, D.F. and Johnson, E.A. 1995. Long-distance wind dispersal of tree seeds. Can. J. Bot. 73: 1036–1045.Google Scholar
  38. Greene, D.F. and Johnson, E.A. 1996. Wind dispersal of seeds from a forest into a clearing. Ecology 77: 595–609.Google Scholar
  39. Greene, D.F., and E.A. Johnson. 1997. Secondary dispersal of tree seeds on snow. Journal of Ecology. 85: 329–340.Google Scholar
  40. Hadley, K. S. 1994. The role of disturbance, topography, and forest structure in the development of a montane forest landscape. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 121: 47–61.Google Scholar
  41. Hobbie, S.E. and Chapin, F.S. III. 1998. The response of tundra plant biomass, aboveground production, nitrogen, and CO2 flux to experimental warming. Ecology 79: 1526–1544.Google Scholar
  42. Holling, C. S. 1992. The role of forest insects in structuring the boreal landscape. In A systems analysis of the global boreal forest. pp. 170–191. Edited by H.H. Shugart, R. Leemans and G.B. Bonan. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  43. Hopkins, D.M., Matthews, J.V., Schweger, C.E. and Young, S.B. (eds). 1982. Paleoecology of Beringia. Academic Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  44. Houghton, J.T., Jenkins, G.J. and Ephraums, J.J. (eds). 1990. Climate change: the IPCC scientific assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  45. Hu, F.S., Brubaker, L.B. and Anderson, P.M. 1993. A 12 000 year record of vegetation change and soil development from Wien Lake, central Alaska. Can. J. Bot. 71: 1133–1142.Google Scholar
  46. Johnson, E.A. 1992. Fire and vegetation dynamics: studies from the North American boreal forest. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  47. Kallio, P. and Lehtonen, J. 1973. Birch forest damage caused by Oporinia automnata (Bkh.) in 1965–66 in Utsjoki, N. Finland. Rep. Kevo Subarctic Res. Station 10: 55–69.Google Scholar
  48. Kasischke, E.S. and French, N.H.F. 1995. Locating and estimating the areal extent of wildfires in Alaskan boreal forests using multiple-season AVHRR NDVI composite data. Remote Sensing Env. 51: 263–275.Google Scholar
  49. Keane, R.E., Morgan, P. and Running, S.W. 1996. FIRE-BGC–A mechanistic ecological process model for simulating fire succession on coniferous forest landscapes of the northern Rocky Mountains. Res. Pap. INT-RP-484. Ogden, Utah: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station.Google Scholar
  50. Kellomaki, S. and Kolstrom, M. 1992. Simulation of tree species composition and organic matter accumulation in Finnish boreal forests under changing climatic conditions. Vegetatio 102: 47–68.Google Scholar
  51. Kielland, K., Bryant, J.P. and Ruess, R.W. 1997. Moose herbivory and carbon turnover of early successional stands in interior Alaska. Oikos 80: 25–30.Google Scholar
  52. Kittel, T.G.F., Steffen, W.L. and Chapin, F.S. III. In press. Global and regional modeling of arctic-boreal vegetation distribution and its sensitivity to altered forcing. Global Change Biology.Google Scholar
  53. Larsen, J.A. 1965. The vegetation of Ennadai Lake area, N.W.T.: studies in subarctic and arctic bioclimatology. Ecol. Monog. 35: 37–59.Google Scholar
  54. Lenihan, J.M. and Neilson, R.P. 1995. Canadian vegetation sensitivity to projected climatic change at three organizational levels. Climatic Change 30: 27–56.Google Scholar
  55. Loehle, C. and LeBlanc, D. 1996. Model-based assessments of climate change effects on forests: A critical review. Ecol. Model. 90: 1–31.Google Scholar
  56. Mattson, W.J. and Haack, R.A. 1987. The role of drought in outbreaks of plant-eating insects. BioScience 37: 110–118.Google Scholar
  57. McCaughey, W.W., Schmidt, W.C. and Shearer, R.C. 1986. Seeddispersal characteristics of conifers in the Inland Mountain West. In Proc. symp. conifer tree seed in the Inland Mountain West. pp. 50–62. Edited by R.C. Shearer. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service. General Technical Report. INT-203.Google Scholar
  58. Neilson, R.P. 1993. Transient ecotone response to climatic change: some conceptual and modelling approaches. Ecol. Appl. 3: 385–395.Google Scholar
  59. Neilson, R.P., King, G.A. and Koerper, G. 1992. Towards a rulebased biome model. Landscape Ecol. 7: 27–43.Google Scholar
  60. Nikolov, N.T. 1995. Modeling transient response of forest ecosystems to climatic change. In Interior west global change workshop. pp. 78–83. Edited by R.W. Tinus. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. RM-GTR-262.Google Scholar
  61. Noble, I.R. 1987. The role of expert systems in vegetation science. Vegetatio 69: 115–121.Google Scholar
  62. Noble, I.R. 1993. A model of the response of ecotones to climate change. Ecol. Appl. 3: 396–403.Google Scholar
  63. Noble, I.R. and Slatyer, R.O. 1980. The use of vital attributes to predict successional changes in plant communities subject to recurrent disturbances. Vegetatio 43: 5–21.Google Scholar
  64. NRC (National Research Council). 1994. The role of terrestrial ecosystems in global change: a plan for action. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  65. Pastor, J. and Post, W.M. 1986. Influence of climate, soil moisture, and succession of forest carbon and nitrogen cycles. Biogeochemistry 2: 3–27.Google Scholar
  66. Pastor, J. and Post, W.M. 1988. Responses of northern forests to CO2-induced climate change. Nature 334: 55–58.Google Scholar
  67. Pastor, J. and Naiman, R.J. 1992. Selective foraging and ecosystem processes in boreal forests. Am. Nat. 139: 690–705.Google Scholar
  68. Payette, S. 1992. Fire as a controlling process in the North American boreal forest. In A systems analysis of the global boreal forest. pp. 170–191. Edited by H.H. Shugart, R. Leemans and G.B. Bonan. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  69. Payette, S. and Gagnon, R. 1985. Late Holocene deforestation and tree regeneration in the forest-tundra of Quebec. Nature 313: 570–572.Google Scholar
  70. Prentice, I.C., Sykes, M.T and Cramer, W. 1991. The possible dynamic response of northern forests to global warming. Global Ecol. Biogeog. Lett. 1: 129–135.Google Scholar
  71. Prentice, I.C., Cramer, W., Harrison, S.P, Leemans, R., Monserud, R.A. and Solomon, A.M. 1992. A global biome model based on plant physiology and dominance, soil properties and climate. J. Biogeog. 19: 117–134.Google Scholar
  72. Ratz, A. 1995. Long-term spatial patterns created by fire: A model oriented towards boreal forests. Int. J. Wildland Fire 5: 25–34.Google Scholar
  73. Robinson, C.H., Wookey, P.A., Lee, J.A., Callaghan, T.V. and Press, M.C. 1998. Plant community responses to simulated environmental change at a high arctic polar semi-desert. Ecology 79: 856–866.Google Scholar
  74. Rothermel, R.C. 1972. A mathematical model for predicting fire spread in wildland fuels. U.S. Forest Service. Research Paper INT-115.Google Scholar
  75. Running, S.W. and Coughlan, J.C. 1988. A general model of forest ecosystem processes for regional applications, I, Hydrologic balance, canopy gas exchange and primary production processes. Ecol. Model. 42: 125–154.Google Scholar
  76. Running, S.W. and Gower, S.T. 1991. FOREST-BGC, a general model of forest ecosystem processes for regional applications, II, Dynamic carbon allocation and nitrogen budgets. Tree Physiol. 9: 147–160.Google Scholar
  77. Selkregg, L.L. 1974a. Alaska regional profiles. Volume 5. Northwest region. University of Alaska Arctic Information and Data Center, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.Google Scholar
  78. Selkregg, L.L. 1974b. Alaska regional profiles. Volume 6. Northwest region. University of Alaska Arctic Information and Data Center, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.Google Scholar
  79. Shugart, H.H., Smith, T.M. and Post, W.M. 1992. The potential application of individual-based simulation models for assessing the effects of global change. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23: 15–38.Google Scholar
  80. Smith, T.M. and Shugart, H.H. 1993. The transient response of terrestrial carbon storage to a perturbed climate. Nature 361: 523–526.Google Scholar
  81. Solomon, A.M. 1986. Transient response of forest to CO2-induced climate change: simulation modeling experiments in eastern North America. Oecologia 68: 567–579.Google Scholar
  82. Solomon, A.M. 1992. The nature and distribution of past, present and future boreal forests: lessons for a research and modeling agenda. In A systems analysis of the global boreal forest. pp. 170–191. Edited by H.H. Shugart, R. Leemans and G.B. Bonan. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  83. Solomon, A.M. and Shugart, H.H. Jr. 1984. Integrating forest-stand simulations with paleoecological records to examine long-term forest dynamics. In State and change of forest ecosystemsindicators in current research. pp. 333–356. Edited by G.I. Agren. Swedish University of Agricultural Science, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
  84. Starfield, A.M., Cummings, D.H.M., Taylor, R.D. and Quadling, M.S. 1993. A frame-based paradigm for dynamic ecosystem models. AI Appl. 7: 1–13.Google Scholar
  85. Starfield, A.M. and Chapin, F.S. III. 1996. Model of transient changes in arctic and boreal vegetation in response to climate and land use change. Ecol. Appl. 6: 842–864.Google Scholar
  86. Stocks, B.J. 1991. The extent and impact of forest fires in northern circumpolar countries. In Global biomass burning: atmospheric, climatic and biospheric implications. pp. 197–202. Edited by J.L. Levine. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.Google Scholar
  87. Susott, R.A. 1982. Characterization of the thermal properties of forest fuels by combustible gas analysis. Forest Sci. 28: 404–420.Google Scholar
  88. Sylvester, T.W. and Wein, R.W. 1981. Fuel characteristics of arctic plant species and simulated plant community flammability by Rothermel's model. Can. J. Bot. 59: 898–907.Google Scholar
  89. Thornwaite, C.W. and Mather, J.R. 1957. Instructions and tables for computing potential evaporation and the water balance. Publ. Climat. 10: 183–311.Google Scholar
  90. Torn, M.S. and Fried, J.S. 1992. Predicting the impacts of global warming on wildland fire. Climatic Change 21: 257–274.Google Scholar
  91. Trigg, W.M. 1971. Fire season climatic zones of mainland Alaska. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Portland, Oregon, USA.Google Scholar
  92. Turner, M.G., Gardner, R.H., Dale, V.H. and O'Neill, R.V. 1989. Predicting the spread of disturbance across heterogeneous landscapes. Oikos 55: 121–129.Google Scholar
  93. Turner, M.G., Romme, W.H., Gardner, R.H., O'Neill, R.V. and Kratz, T.K. 1993. A revised concept of landscape equilibrium: Disturbance and stability on scaled landscapes. Landscape Ecol. 8: 213–227.Google Scholar
  94. Turner, M.G. and Romme, W.H. 1994. Landscape dynamics in crown fire ecosystems. Landscape Ecol. 9: 59–77.Google Scholar
  95. Turner, M.G., Hargrove, W.H., Gardner, R.H. and Romme, W.H. 1994a. Effects of fire on landscape heterogeneity in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. J. Veg. Sci. 5: 731–742.Google Scholar
  96. Turner, M.G., Romme, W.H. and Gardner, R.H. 1994b. Landscape disturbance models and long-term dynamics of natural areas. Natural Areas J. 14: 3–11.Google Scholar
  97. Turner, M.G., Romme, W.H., Gardner, R.H. and Hargrove, W.W. 1997. Effects of fire size and pattern on early succession in Yellowstone National Park. Ecol. Monog. 67: 411–433.Google Scholar
  98. Van Cleve, K., and L. A. Viereck. 1981. Forest succession in relation to nutrient cycling in the boreal forest of Alaska. In Forest succession concept and application. pp. 185–211. Edited by D.C. West, H.H. Shugart and D. Botkin. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  99. Van Cleve, K., Chapin, F.S. III, Dyrness, C.T. and Viereck, L.A. 1991. Element cycling in taiga forests: State-factor control. BioScience 41: 78–88.Google Scholar
  100. Van Cleve, K., Viereck, L.A. and Dyrness, C.T. 1996. State factor control of soils and forest succession along the Tanana River in interior Alaska, USA. Arctic Alpine Res. 28: 388–400.Google Scholar
  101. Van Wagner, C.E. 1983. Fire behaviour in northern coniferous forests and shrublands. In The role of fire in northern circumpolar ecosystems. pp. 65–80. Edited by R.W. Wein and D.A. MacLean. Wiley, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  102. Viereck, L.A. 1973. Wildfire in the taiga of Alaska. Quat. Res. 3: 465–495.Google Scholar
  103. Viereck, L.A. 1979. Characteristics of treeline plant communities in Alaska. Holarctic Ecol. 2: 228–238.Google Scholar
  104. Viereck, L.A. and Van Cleve, K. 1984. Some aspects of vegetation and temperature relationships in the Alaskan taiga. In The potential effects of carbon dioxide-induced climatic changes in Alaska. pp. 129–142. Edited by J.H. McBeath. School of Agriculture and Land Resources Management, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA.Google Scholar
  105. Wolfram, S. 1984. Cellular automata as models of complexity. Nature 311: 419–424.Google Scholar
  106. Zasada, J.C., Foote, M.J., Deneke, F.J. and Parkerson, R.H. 1978. Case history of an excellent white spruce cone and seed crop in interior Alaska: cone and seed production, germination, and seedling survival. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest Experiment Station. General Technical Report. PNW-65.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Scott Rupp
    • 1
  • Anthony M. Starfield
    • 1
  • F. Stuart ChapinIII
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Ecology, Evolution, and BehaviorUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  2. 2.Institute of Arctic BiologyUniversity of AlaskaFairbanksUSA

Personalised recommendations