Climatic Change

, Volume 50, Issue 3, pp 355–376 | Cite as

Physiologic Plasticity, Evolution, and Impacts of a Changing Climate on Pinus Contorta

  • Gerald E. Rehfeldt
  • William R. Wykoff
  • Cheng C. Ying

Abstract

Climate response functions for 125 Pinus contorta populations were updated to assess the impact of 16 climate change scenarios on forest productivity. Productivity was defined as the volume of wood expected per hectare at age 20 and was calculated as the product of predicted individual tree volumes, an initial stocking (1600 trees ha−1), and predicted survival. Impact was considered according to the transient effects of a changing climate governed by (1) physiological plasticity in the contemporary generation and (2) long-term evolutionary adjustments that provide adaptedness and optimize productivity in future generations. Direct short-term plastic responses were geographically complex and had repercussions throughout the species' distribution even when temperature fluctuations were small (± 1 ° C) and changes in distribution were inconsequential. Evolutionary adjustments ameliorated negative short-term impacts while enhancing the positive. Scenarios that encompassed predictions for global warming produced short-term impacts that were negative in the south and positive in the north, but subsequent evolutionary adjustments projected substantial increases in productivity. The long-term adjustments may require only 1 to 3 generations in the north but 6 to 12 generations in the south, thereby taking between 200 and 1200 years.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Arthur, W.: 1987, The Niche in Competition and Evolution, Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  2. Benson, R. E.: 1982, Management Consequences of Alternative Harvesting and Residue Treatment Practices – Lodgepole Pine, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report INT-132, Ogden, UT.Google Scholar
  3. Betancourt, J. L.: 1990, 'Late Quaternary Biogeography of the Colorado Plateau', in a Betancourt, J. L., Van Devender, T.R., and Martin, P. S. (eds.), Packrat Middens, the Last 40,000 Years of Biotic Change, University Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ.Google Scholar
  4. Box, E. O., Crumpacker, D. W., and Hardin, E. D.: 1993, 'A Climatic Model for Location of Plant Species in Florida, U.S.A.', J. Biogeogr. 20, 629–644.Google Scholar
  5. Box, E. O., Crumpacker, D. W., and Hardin, E. D.: 1999, 'Predicted Effects of Climatic Change on Distribution of Ecologically Important Native Tree and Shrub Species in Florida', Clim. Change 41, 213–248.Google Scholar
  6. Bradshaw, A. D.: 1965, 'Evolutionary Significance of Phenotypic Plasticity in Plants', Adv. Genet. 13, 115–155.Google Scholar
  7. Davis, M. B.: 1989, 'Lags in Vegetation Response to Greenhouse Warming', Clim. Change 15, 75–82.Google Scholar
  8. DeLucia, E. H., Hamilton, J. G., Naidu, S. L., Thomas, R. B., Andrews, J. A., Finzi, A., Lavine, M., Matamala, R., Mohan, J. E., Hendrey, G. R., and Schlesinger, W. H.: 1999, 'Net Primary Production of a Forest Ecosystem with Experimental CO2 Enrichment', Science 284, 1177–1179.Google Scholar
  9. Falconer, D. S.: 1981, Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, Longman Press, London, U.K.Google Scholar
  10. Ferguson, S. A.: 1997, A Climate-Change Scenario for the Columbia River Basin, U.S. Dept. Agric., Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, PNW-RP-499.Google Scholar
  11. Futuyma, D. J.: 1997, Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MA.Google Scholar
  12. Giorgi, F., Brodeur, C. S., and Bates, G. T.: 1994, 'Regional Climate-Change Scenarios over the United States Produced with a Nested Regional Climate Model', J. Climate 7, 375–399.Google Scholar
  13. Husch, G., Miller, E. I., and Beers, T. W.: 1972, Forest Mensuration, Ronald Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  14. Hutchinson, G. E.: 1958, 'Concluding Remarks', Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 22, 415–427.Google Scholar
  15. Illingworth, K.: 1978, 'Study of Lodgepole Pine Genotype-Environment Interaction in B.C.', in Proceedings IUFRO Joint Meeting of Working Parties: Douglas-Fir Provenances, Lodgepole Pine Provenances, Sitka Spruce Provenances and Abies Provenances, Vancouver, B.C., pp. 151–158.Google Scholar
  16. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change): 1996a, 'ClimateModels – Projections of Future Climate', Chapter 6, Climate Change 1995 – The Science of Climate Change, Contributions of Working Group 1 to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.Google Scholar
  17. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change): 1996b, 'Terrestrial Biotic Responses to Environmental Change and Feedbacks to Climate', Chapter 9, Climate Change 1995 – The Science of Climate Change, Contributions of Working Group 1 to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.Google Scholar
  18. Iverson, L. R. and Prasad, A. M.: 1998, 'Predicting Abundance of 80 Tree Species Following Climate Change in the Eastern United States', Ecol. Monog. 68, 465–485.Google Scholar
  19. King, G. A. and Neilson, R. P.: 1992. 'The Transient Response of Vegetation to Climate Change: A Potential Source of CO2 to the Atmosphere', Water Air Soil Pollut. 64, 365–383.Google Scholar
  20. Kozak, A.: 1988, 'A Variable-Exponent Taper Equation', Can. J. Forest Res. 18, 1363–1368.Google Scholar
  21. Kurz, W. A., Apps, M. J., Stocks, B. J., and Volney, J. A.: 1995. 'Global Climate Change: Disturbance Regimes and Biospheric Feedbacks of Temperate and Boreal Forests', in Woodwell, G. M. and Mackenzie, F. T. (eds.), Biotic Feedbacks in the Global Climatic System, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  22. Mitchell, K. J., Grout, S. E., and Macdonald, R. N.: 1995, 'User's Guide for Producing Managed Stand Yield Tables with WinTIPSY Version 1.3 under Microsoft Windows', Ministry of Forests, Research Branch, Victoria, B.C.Google Scholar
  23. Monserud, R. A., Tchebakova, N. M., and Leemans, R.: 1993: 'Global Vegetation Change Predicted by the Modified Budyko Model', Clim. Change 25, 59–83.Google Scholar
  24. Nuszdorfer, F. C., Klinka, K., and Demarchi, D. A.: 1991, 'Coastal Douglas-fir Zone', in Meidinger, D. and Pojar, J. (eds.), Ecosystems of British Columbia, British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Special Report Series, No. 6, Victoria, B.C., pp. 81–94.Google Scholar
  25. Overpeck, J. T. and Bartlein, P. J.: 1989, 'Assessing the Response of Vegetation to Future Climate Change: Ecological Response Surfaces and Paleoecological Model Validation', The Potential Effects of Global Climate Change on the United States, Appendix D, Forests, United States Environmental Protection Agency Report PM-221.Google Scholar
  26. Pielou, E. C.: 1991, After the Ice, University Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  27. 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. Biogeogr. 19, 117–134.Google Scholar
  28. Rehfeldt, G. E.: 1985, 'Genetic Variances and Covariances in Pinus contorta: Estimates of Genetic Gains from Index Selection', Silvae Genet. 34, 26–33.Google Scholar
  29. Rehfeldt, G. E.: 1990, 'Adaptation of Picea engelmanii Populations to the Heterogeneous Environments of the Intermountain West', Can. J. Bot. 72, 1197–1208.Google Scholar
  30. Rehfeldt, G. E.: 1997, 'Quantitative Analyses of the Genetic Structure of Closely Related Conifers with Disparate Distributions and Demographics: The Cupressus arizonica Complex', Amer. J. Bot. 84, 190–200.Google Scholar
  31. Rehfeldt, G. E., Ying, C. C., Spittlehouse, D. L., and Hamilton, D. A.: 1999, 'Genetic Responses to Climate in Pinus contorta: Niche Breadth, Climate Change, and Reforestation', Ecol. Monog. 69, 375–407.Google Scholar
  32. 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
  33. Smith, T.M., Shugart, H. H., Bonan, G. B., and Smith, J. B.: 1992, 'Modeling the Potential Response of Vegetation to Global Climate Change', Adv. Ecol. Res. 22, 93–116.Google Scholar
  34. Solomon, A. M. and Kirilenko, A. P.: 1997, 'Climate Change and Terrestrial Biomass:What If Trees Do Not Migrate?', Global Ecol. Biogeog. Lett. 6, 139–148.Google Scholar
  35. Tackle, D.: 1959, Silvics of Lodgepole Pine, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station Miscellaneous Publication 19, Ogden, UT.Google Scholar
  36. Vyse, A. and Navratil, S.: 1985, 'Advances in Lodgepole Pine Regeneration', in Baumgartner, D.M., Krebil, R. G., Arnott, J. T., and Weetman, G. F. (eds.), Lodgepole Pine: The Species and its Management Google Scholar
  37. Spokane, WA and Vancouver, B.C., 1984, Washington State University, Cooperative Extensive Service, Pullman, WA, pp. 173–186.Google Scholar
  38. Webb, T. III, 1986.: 'Is Vegetation in Equilibrium with Climate? How to Interpret Late-Quaternary Pollen Data', Vegetatio 67, 75–91.Google Scholar
  39. Wheeler, N. C. and Critchfield, W. B.: 1985. 'The Distribution and Botanical Characteristics of Lodgepole Pine', in Baumgartner, D. M., Krebil, R. G., Arnott, J. T., and Weetman, G. F. (eds.), Lodgepole Pine: The Species and its Management, Spokane, WA and Vancouver, B.C., 1984, Washington State University, Cooperative Extensive Service, Pullman, WA, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
  40. Wigley, T.M. L. and Raper, S. C. B.: 1992, 'Implications for Climate and Sea Level of Revised IPCC Emissions Scenarios', Nature 357, 293–300.Google Scholar
  41. Woodwell, G. M.: 1995, 'Biotic Feedbacks from the Warming of the Earth', in Woodwell, G. M. and Mackenxie, F. T. (eds.), Biotic Feedbacks in the Global Climatic System, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  42. Xie, C. and Ying, C. C.: 1995, 'Genetic Architecture and Adaptive Landscape of Interior Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta ssp. latifolia) in Canada', Can. J. Forest Res. 25, 2010–2021.Google Scholar
  43. Ying, C. C. and Liang, Q.: 1994, 'Geographic Pattern of Adaptive Variation of Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta Dougl.) within the Species' Coastal Range: Field Performance at Age 20 Years', Forest Ecol. Manage. 67, 281–298.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerald E. Rehfeldt
    • 1
  • William R. Wykoff
    • 1
  • Cheng C. Ying
    • 2
  1. 1.Rocky Mountain Research StationUSDA Forest SerivceMoscowU.S.A
  2. 2.Research BranchBritish Columbia Ministry of ForestsVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations