The Role of Experimental Forests and Ranges in the Development of Ecosystem Science and Biogeochemical Cycling Research

  • James M. VoseEmail author
  • Wayne T. Swank
  • Mary Beth Adams
  • Devendra Amatya
  • John Campbell
  • Sherri Johnson
  • Frederick J. Swanson
  • Randy Kolka
  • Ariel E. Lugo
  • Robert Musselman
  • Charles Rhoades


Forest Service watershed-based Experimental Forests and Ranges (EFRs) have significantly advanced scientific knowledge on ecosystem structure and function through long-term monitoring and experimental research on hydrologic and biogeochemical cycling processes. Research conducted in the 1940s and 1950s began as “classic” paired watershed studies. The emergence of the concept of ecosystem science in the 1950s and 1960s, the passage of the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act in the 1970s, the nonpoint source pollution provision enacted in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and various other forces led to an increased interest in biogeochemical cycling processes. The ecosystem concept recognized that water, nutrient, and carbon cycles were tightly linked, and interdisciplinary approaches that examined the roles of soil, vegetation, and associated biota, as well as the atmospheric environment, were needed to understand these linkages. In addition to providing a basic understanding, several watershed-based EFRs have been at the core of the development and application of watershed ecosystem analysis to ecosystem management, and they continue to provide science to land managers and policy makers. The relevance and usefulness of watershed-based EFRs will only increase in the coming years. Stressors such as climate change and increased climate variability, invasive and noninvasive insects and diseases, and the pressures of population growth and land-use change increase the value of long-term records for detecting resultant changes in ecosystem structure and function.


Long-term data Watersheds Interdisciplinary Nutrient cycling Ecosystem management 


  1. Adams MB, Burger JA, Jenkins AB, Zelazny L (2000) Impact of harvesting and atmospheric pollution and nutrient depletion of eastern U.S. hardwood forests. For Ecol Manage 138(1):301–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams MB, DeWalle DR, Hom JL (eds) (2006) The Fernow watershed acidification study. Springer-Verlag, New York, 279 pCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adams MB, Loughry L, Plaugher L (comp.) (2008) Experimental Forests and Ranges of the USDA Forest Service. General Technical Report NE-321 Revised, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA, 178 p, [CD ROM]Google Scholar
  4. Amatya DM, Trettin CC (2007a) Development of watershed hydrologic research at Santee Experimental Forest, Coastal South Carolina. In: Furniss M, Clifton C, Ronenberg K (eds) Advancing the fundamental sciences: proceedings of the Forest Service National Earth Sciences Conference, San Diego, CA, October 18–22, 2004, PNW-GTR 689, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Northwest Station, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  5. Amatya DM, Trettin CC (2007b) An eco-hydrological project on Turkey Creek Watershed, South Carolina, U.S.A. In: Meire P et al (eds) Integrated water management: practical experiences and case studies, NATO science series IV: earth and environmental sciences. Springer, Netherlands, pp 115–126Google Scholar
  6. Bormann FH, Likens GE (1967) Nutrient cycling. Science 155:424–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bosch JM, Hewlett JD (1982) A review of catchment experiments to determine the effect of vegetation changes on water yield and evapotranspiration. J Hydro 55:3–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Christensen NL, Bartuska AM, Brown JH, Carpenter S, D’Antonio C, Francis R, Franklin JF, MacMahon JA, Noss RF, Parsons DJ, Peterson CH, Turner MG, Woodmansee RG (1996) The report of the ecological society of America committee on the scientific basis for ecosystem management. Ecol Appl 6:665–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cissel JH, Swanson FJ, McKee WA, Burditt AL (1994) Using the past to plan the future in the Pacific Northwest. J For 92(8):30–31, 46Google Scholar
  10. Douglass JE, Hoover MD (1988) History of Coweeta. In: Swank WT, Crossley DA Jr (eds) Forest hydrology and ecology at Coweeta. Ecological studies, vol 66. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 17–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Edwards PJ, Kochenderfer JN, Coble DW, Adams MB (2002) Soil leachate responses during 10 years of induced whole-watershed acidification. Water Air Soil Pollut 140:99–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Franklin JF (1989) Importance and justification of long-term studies in ecology. In: Likens GE (ed) Long-term studies in ecology: approaches and alternatives. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 3–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Franklin JF, Cromack K Jr, Denison W, McKee A, Maser C, Sedell J, Swanson F, Juday G (1981) General Technical Report PNW-GTR-118, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 48 pGoogle Scholar
  14. Geier MG (2007) Necessary work: discovering old forests new outlooks, and community on the HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, 1948–2000. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. General Technical Report PNW-GTR687, 357 pGoogle Scholar
  15. Groffman PM, Driscoll CT, Likens GE, Fahey TJ, Holmes RT, Eagar C, Aber JD (2004) Nor gloom of night: a new conceptual model for the Hubbard Brook ecosystem study. BioScience 54:139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heartsill-Scalley T, Scatena FN, Estrada C, McDowell WH, Lugo AE (2007) Disturbance and long-term patterns of rainfall and throughfall nutrient fluxes in a subtropical wet forest in Puerto Rico. Journal of Hydrology 333:472–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heartsill-Scalley T, Scatena FN, Lugo AE, Moya S, Estrada-Ruiz C (2010) Changes in structure, composition and nutrients during 15 year of hurricane-induced succession in a subtropical wet forest in Puerto Rico. Biotropica 42:455–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hornbeck JW, Swank WT (1992) Watershed ecosystem analysis as a basis for multiple-use management of eastern forests. Ecol Appl 2(3):238–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ice G, Stednick JD (eds) (2004) A century of forest and wildland lessons. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, 287 pGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnson PL, Swank WT (1973) Studies on cation budgets in the southern Appalachians on four experimental watersheds with contrasting vegetation. Ecology 54:70–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kessler WB, Salwasser H, Cartwright CW Jr, Caplan JA (1992) New perspectives for sustainable natural resources management. Ecol Appl 6:738–740Google Scholar
  22. Kolka RK, Grigal DF, Verry ES, Nater EA (1999) Mercury and organic carbon relationships in streams draining forested upland/peatland watersheds. J Environ Qual 28:766–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kolka RK, Sebestyen SD, Verry ES, Brooks KN (eds) (2011) Peatland biogeochemistry and watershed hydrology at the Marcell experimental forest. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  24. Likens GE (ed) (1989) Long-term studies in ecology: approaches and alternatives. Sringer-Verlag, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Likens GE, Bormann FH (1995) Biogeochemistry of a forested ecosystem, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag New York Inc., New York, 159 pCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lugo AE, Scatena FN (1995) Ecosystem-level properties of the Luquillo experimental forest with emphasis on the tabonuco forest. In: Lugo AE, Lowe C (eds) Tropical forests: management and ecology. Springer, New York, pp 59–108Google Scholar
  27. Lugo AE, Baron JS, Frost TP, Cundy TW, Dittberner P (1999) Ecosystem processes and functioning. In: Szaro RC, Johnson NC, Sexton WT, Malk AJ (eds) Ecological stewardship: a common reference for ecosystem management. Elsevier Science, Oxford, pp 219–254Google Scholar
  28. March JG, Benstead JP, Pringle CM, Scatena FN (2003) Damming tropical island streams: problems, solutions, and alternatives. Bio Sci 53:1069–1078Google Scholar
  29. Markewitz D, Richter DD, Allen HL, Urrego JB (1998) Three decades of observed soil acidification at the Calhoun experimental forest: has acid rain made a difference? Soil Sci Soc Am J 62:1428–1439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Metz LJ (1952) Weight and nitrogen and calcium content of the annual litter fall of forests in the South Carolina Piedmont. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 16:38–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Metz LJ (1954) Forest floor in the Piedmont region of South Carolina. Soil Sci Soc Am Proc 18:335–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Metz LJ (1958) The Calhoun experimental forest. Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, p 24Google Scholar
  33. Meyer JL, Swank WT (1996) Ecosystem management challenges ecologists. Ecol Appl 6(3):738–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Musselman RC (technical editor) (1994) The glacier lakes ecosystem experiments site. General Technical Report RM-249. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO, p 96.
  35. Odum EP (1959) Fundamentals of ecology, 2nd edn. Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  36. Odum EP (1969) The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164:262–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Philips MJ, Swift LW Jr, Blinn CR (2000) Best management practices for riparian areas. In: Verry ES, Hornbeck JW, Dolloff CA (eds) Riparian management of forests of continental eastern. U.S. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp 272–285Google Scholar
  38. Reuss JO, Stottlemyer R, Troendle CA (1997) Effect of clearcutting on nutrient fluxes in a subalpine forest at Fraser, Colorado. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 1:333–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rhoades C, Elder K, Hubbard R, Dixon M (2008) Streamwater chemistry and nutrient export during five years of bark beetle infestation of subalpine watersheds at the Fraser experimental forest, Eos Trans. AGU, 89(53), Fall Meeting Suppl, AbstractH13C-0929Google Scholar
  40. Richter DD, Ralston CW, Harms WR (1982) Prescribed fire: effects on water quality and forest nutrient cycling. Science 215:661–663PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Richter DD, Ralston CW, Harms WR (1983) Chemical composition and spatial variation of bulk precipitation at a coastal plain watershed in South Carolina. Water Resour Res 19(1):134–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Richter DD, Markewitz D (2001) Understanding soil change: sustainability of soils over millennia, centuries, and decades. Cambridge University Press, UKGoogle Scholar
  43. Riedel MS, Swift LW Jr, Vose JM, Clinton BD (2007) Forest road erosion research at the Coweeta hydrologic laboratory. In: Furniss M, Clifton C, Ronnenberg K (eds) Advancing the fundamental sciences, pp 197–205. Proceedings of the Forest Service National Earth Science Conference, 18–22 October 2004, San Diego, CA PNW-GTR-689, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  44. Scatena FN (1989) An introduction to the physiography and history of the Bisley experimental watersheds in the Luquillo Mountains of Puerto Rico. General Technical Report SO-72, USDA Forest service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, New OrleansGoogle Scholar
  45. Scatena FN, Lugo AE (1995) Geomorphology, disturbance, and the soil and vegetation of two subtropical wet steepland watersheds of Puerto Rico. Geomorphology 13:199–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Scatena FN, Moya S, Estrada C, Chinea JD (1996) The first five years in the reorganization of aboveground biomass and nutrient use following Hurricane Hugo in the Bisley Experimental Watersheds, Luquillo Experimental Forest, Puerto Rico. Biotropica 28:424–440Google Scholar
  47. Sebestyen S, Kolka R (submitted) Experimental forest and range synthesis: Marcell experimental forest. General Technical Report WO-XX, USDA Forest Service, Washington Office, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  48. Sollins P, McCorison FM (1981) Nitrogen and carbon solution chemistry of an old growth coniferous forest watershed before and after cutting. Water Resour Res 17(5):1409–1418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sollins P, Grier C, McCorison FM, Cromack K Jr, Fogel R, Fredriksen RL (1980) The internal element cycles of an old-growth Douglas-fir ecosystem in western Oregon. Ecol Monogr 50(3):261–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sollins P, Cromack K Jr, McCorison FM, Waring RH, Harr RD (1981) Changes in nitrogen cycling at an old-growth Douglas-fir site after disturbance. J Environ Qual 10(1):37–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stednick JD, Troendle CA, Ice GG (2004) Lessons for watershed research in the future. In: Ice GG, Stednick JD (eds) A century of forest and wildland watershed lessons. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, pp 277–287Google Scholar
  52. Stottlemyer R, Troendle CA (1987) Trends in streamwater chemistry and input-output balances, Fraser experimental forest, Colorado RP-RM-275. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort CollinsGoogle Scholar
  53. Stottlemyer R, Troendle CA (1999) Effect of subalpine canopy removal on snowpack, soil solution, and nutrient export, Fraser Experimental Forest, CO. Hydrol Process 13:2287–2299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Swank WT (1988) Stream chemistry responses to disturbance. In: Swank WT, Crossley DA Jr (eds) Forest hydrology and ecology at Coweeta. Ecological Studies, vol 66. Springer-Verlag, New York, 339–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Swank WT, Johnson CE (1994) Small catchment research in the evaluation and development of forest management practices. In: Moldan B, Cerny J (eds) Biogeochemistry of small catchments: a tool for environmental research. Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) 51. Wiley, Chichester, pp 383–408Google Scholar
  56. Swank WT, Van Lear DH (1992) Multiple—use management: ecosystem perspectives of multiple—use management. Ecol Appl 2(3):219–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Swank WT, Vose JM (1994) Long-term hydrologic and stream chemistry responses of southern Appalachian catchments following conversion from mixed hardwoods to white pine. In: Landolt R (ed) HydrologiekleinerEinzugsgebiete: Gedenkschrift Hans M. Keller. BeitragezurHydrologie der Schweiz 35.Bern, Schweizerische: SchweizerischeGesellschaft fur Hydrologie und Limnologie, pp 164–172Google Scholar
  58. Swank WT, Waide JB, Crossley DA Jr, Todd RL (1981) Insect defoliation enhances nitrate export from forest ecosytems. Oecologia 51:297–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Swank WT, Meyer JL, Crossley DA Jr (2002) Long-term ecological research: Coweeta history and perspectives Chapter 8. In: Barrett GW, Barrett TL (eds) Holistic science—the evolution of the Georgia Institute of Ecology (1940–2000). Taylor & Francis, New York, pp 143–163Google Scholar
  60. Tilley DR, Swank WT (2003) EMERGY-based environmental systems assessment of a multi-purpose temperate mixed-forest watershed of the southern Appalachian Mountains, USA. J Environ Manage 69:213–227PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Triska FJ, Sedell JR, Cromack K Jr (1984) Nitrogen budget for a small coniferous forest stream. Ecol Monogr 54(1):119–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Verry ES (1975) Streamflow chemistry and nutrient yields from upland-peatland watersheds in Minnesota. Ecology 56:1149–1157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Verry ES (1976) Estimating water yield differences between hardwood and pine forests. Research paper NC-128, USDA Forest Service, St. Paul, MN, 12 pGoogle Scholar
  64. Verry ES (2004) Land fragmentation and impacts to streams and fish in the central and upper Midwest. In: Ice GG, Stednick JD (eds) Lessons for watershed research in the future: a century of forest and wildland watershed lessons. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, pp 129–154Google Scholar
  65. Verry ES, Lewis JR, Brooks KN (1983) Aspen clearcutting increases snowmelt and storm flow peaks in north central Minnesota. Water Resour Bull 19(1):59–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Verry ES, Hornbeck JW, Todd AH (2000) Watershed research and management in the Lake States and northeastern United States. In: Ffolliott PF, Baker MB, Edminster CB, Dillon MC, Mora KL (eds) Land stewardship in the 21st century: the contributions of watershed management. Conference proceedings, Tuscon, AZ, 13–16 March 2000, USDA Forest Service, Fort Collins, CO, pp 81–92Google Scholar
  67. Wells CG, Jorgensen JR (1975) Nutrient cycling in loblolly pine plantations. In: Bernier B, Winget CH (ed) Forest soils and forest land management, Fourth North American forest soils conference. Laval University Press, Quebec, pp 137–158Google Scholar
  68. Wells CG, Jorgensen JR (1979) Effect of intensive harvesting on nutrient supply and sustained productivity. In: Leaf A (ed) Impact of intensive harvesting on forest nutrient cycling. State University of New York at Syracuse, USA, pp 212–230Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • James M. Vose
    • 1
    Email author
  • Wayne T. Swank
    • 2
  • Mary Beth Adams
    • 3
  • Devendra Amatya
    • 4
  • John Campbell
    • 5
  • Sherri Johnson
    • 6
  • Frederick J. Swanson
    • 7
  • Randy Kolka
    • 8
  • Ariel E. Lugo
    • 9
  • Robert Musselman
    • 10
  • Charles Rhoades
    • 10
  1. 1.Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, College of Natural ResourcesNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  2. 2.Southern Research Station (Emeritus)USDA Forest Service Coweeta Hydrologic LaboratoryOttoUSA
  3. 3.Northern Research StationUSDA Forest Service, Timber & Watershed LaboratoryParsonsUSA
  4. 4.Southern Research StationUSDA Forest Service, Santee Experimental ForestCordesvilleUSA
  5. 5.Northern Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceDurhamUSA
  6. 6.Pacific Northwest Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceCorvallisUSA
  7. 7.Pacific Northwest Research Station (retired)USDA Forest ServiceBlue RiverUSA
  8. 8.Northern Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceGrand RapidsUSA
  9. 9.International Institute of Tropical ForestryUSDA Forest ServiceSan JuanUSA
  10. 10.Rocky Mountain Research StationUSDA Forest ServcieFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations