* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Dynamics of Alaska Boreal Forest under Climate Change
Survey
Document related concepts
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup
Atmospheric model wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Dynamics of Alaska Boreal Forest under Climate Change Jingjing Liang a, Mo Zhou a, Dave L. Verbyla b, Lianjun Zhang c, Anna L. Springsteen d, Thomas Malone b a Division of Forestry and Natural Resources, West Virginia University b School of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences, University of Alaska Fairbanks, c Department of Forest and Natural Resources Management, SUNY-ESF d Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning, University of Alaska Fairbanks Alaska Boreal Forest • Largest forest component in the U.S. (500,000km2) • A biome characterized by coniferous forests • Grow under the most severe climate conditions in the world • Forest industry is scarce, but with great potentials 2 Alaska Boreal Forest 4 Major species: • Picea glauca (white spruce) • Picea mariana (black spruce) • Betula neoalaskana (Alaska birch) • Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) 3 An Inconvenient Situation • Global climate change is strengthened by human induced greenhouse gas emissions (e.g. IPCC, 2007) • Climate change is affecting forests around the world, especially in the northern high latitudes (e.g. Serreze et al., 2000) • Studies on the dynamics of Alaska boreal forest are sporadic and rare (Wurtz et al., 2006 ) • Forest management in the region has been conducted in the absence of a useful growth model (Alaska DNR, 2001) 4 Objectives • Develop a spatial-explicit and climate-sensitive matrix model for ABF • Verify model accuracy and compare it with other existing models for the region • Apply the model to map forest dynamics under three IPCC climate change scenarios across the region 5 Forest Inventory Data Cooperative Alaska Forest Inventory (CAFI) (Malone, Liang, and Packee, 2009) • 1st inventory started in 1994 • New plots added on an annual basis • Established plots remeasured with a 5-year interval • More than 100,000 tree records from over 600 plots 6 Forest Inventory Data Tree-level variables D Diameter at breast height (cm) of a live tree g Diameter increment (cm) m Mortality rate of a live tree in a given period Plot-level variables R Recruitment N Total number of trees per hectare B Stand basal area (m2ha-1) z Plot elevation (103m) l Plot slope (%) a Plot aspect T Mean growing season temperature (°C) P Total growth year precipitation (100mm) λ WGS84 Longitude (°) φ WGS84 Latitude (°) 7 Climate Projection of ABF (IPCC, 2001) 15 • A2: High emission. Independently operating and self-reliant nations, continuously increasing populations, and regionally oriented economic development Temperature (°C) Three IPCC Scenarios 16 alternative energy technologies B1 13 12 • A1B: Medium emission. A more integrated 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 7.5 Precipitation (100mm) • B1: Low Emission. Rapid adaptation of A1B 14 11 2010 world with rapid economic growth and a balanced technological emphasis across all sources A2 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 2010 Year 8 Methods: Climate-Sensitive Matrix Model T: mean summer temperature P: growth-year precipitation y t 1 = G(Tt , Pt ) y t R(Tt , Pt ) Tree growth depends largely on temperature and soil water conditions of the current year (Barnes et al. 1998. Forest Ecology (4th ed.) ) 9 Methods: Mapping Forest Dynamics • For each pixel s: y t 1 (s) G(s)y t (s) R(s) • Initial stand conditions are obtained from USGS DEM and 2001 NLCD • Projected dynamics of each pixel is then aggregated to map the entire region (Liang and Zhou, 2010) 10 Results: Climate-Induced Changes Stem Density % changes from the constant climate of the 397 sample plots under 3 IPCC emission scenarios A2 A1B A B1 0 -5 -10 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 Basal Area B 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 -1.5 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 C Diversity 5 3 1 -1 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Year 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 11 Predicted 2100 ABF Vegetation under Climate Change 12 Predicted ABF Basal Area Change 2000-2100 13 Predicted ABF Diversity Change 2000-2100 14 Results: Model Accuracy 1.5 1.5 RMSE(A)=1.42 RMSE(B)=1.47 RMSE(C)=1.66 birch 1 0.5 0.5 RMSE(A)=1.36 RMSE(B)=1.78 RMSE(C)=1.82 m2 / ha 1 aspen 0 0 0 1.5 5 10 15 20 25 w hite spruce 30 35 40 0 0.2 RMSE(A)=2.48 RMSE(B)=2.16 RMSE(C)=2.72 5 10 15 20 25 black spruce 30 35 40 RMSE(A)=0.33 RMSE(B)=0.42 RMSE(C)=0.33 m2 / ha 1 Observed CSMatrix (A) CTS (B) Conv. (C) 0.1 0.5 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 Diameter (cm) 25 30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Diameter (cm) Ref: CTS Model-Liang and Zhou, 2010; Conv. Model- Liang, 2010) 15 Conclusion: Key Findings • Basal area of ABF could continue to increase due to natural succession • Temperature-induced drought stress would hinder the increase of basal area across the region, especially in dry upland areas • Climate change would boost stand diversity across the region through transient species redistribution 16 Conclusion: Model Limitations • Sample range: 7-14°C. Extrapolation may be subject to bias. • Lack of control for major disturbances 17 Acknowledgement We thank Dr. Tara M. Barrett, Dr. Joseph Buongiorno, and Dr. David Valentine for their helpful comments on this manuscript. The spatial analysis was assisted by the Scenarios Network for Arctic Planning of the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Contact Information: Jingjing Liang West Virginia University http://jingjing.liang.forestry.wvu.edu/ Tel: 304-293-1577, Email: [email protected] 18 19 Background: Forest Dynamics Modelling Forest Matrix Model •Superior Accuracy (Liang et al., 2005) •Superior Applicability (Liang et al., 2006) •Matrix model is constantly evolving - Diversity effects (Liang et al., 2007) - Geospatial trend (Liang and Zhou, 2010) - Climatic effects (Liang et al., in review) Ref: Liang et al., 2005. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 35: 2369-2382. Liang et al., 2006. Forest Science 52(5): 579-594. 20 Methods: Climate-Sensitive Matrix (CSMatrix) Model Components • Upgrowth: g ij (s) f1 ( Dij , B(s), (T , P, s), (l , , z, s)) • Mortality: mij (s) f 2 ( Dij , B(s), (T , P, s), (l , , z, s)) • Recruitment: Ri (s) f 3 ( Ni , B(s), (T , P, s), (l , , z, s)) 21 Methods: Model Selection Criteria • expected biological responses • statistical significance • contribution to the model goodness-of-fit (hierarchical partitioning, see Chevan and Sutherland, 1991) 22