The response of forests to climate change depends in part on whether the photosynthetic benefit from increased atmospheric CO2(∆Ca= future minus historic CO2) compensates for increased physiological stresses from higher temperature (∆T). We predicted the outcome of these competing responses by using optimization theory and a mechanistic model of tree water transport and photosynthesis. We simulated current and future productivity, stress, and mortality in mature monospecific stands with soil, species, and climate sampled from 20 continental US locations. We modeled stands with and without acclimation to ∆Caand ∆T, where acclimated forests adjusted leaf area, photosynthetic capacity, and stand density to maximize productivity while avoiding stress. Without acclimation, the ∆Ca-driven boost in net primary productivity (NPP) was compromised by ∆T-driven stress and mortality associated with vascular failure. With acclimation, the ∆Ca-driven boost in NPP and stand biomass (C storage) was accentuated for cooler futures but negated for warmer futures by a ∆T-driven reduction in NPP and biomass. Thus, hotter futures reduced forest biomass through either mortality or acclimation. Forest outcomes depended on whether projected climatic ∆Ca/∆T ratios were above or below physiological thresholds that neutralized the negative impacts of warming. Critically, if forests do not acclimate, the ∆Ca/∆T must be aboveca. 89 ppm⋅°C−1to avoid chronic stress, a threshold met by 55% of climate projections. If forests do acclimate, the ∆Ca/∆T must rise aboveca. 67 ppm⋅°C−1for NPP and biomass to increase, a lower threshold met by 71% of projections.

Global warming is expected to exacerbate the duration and intensity of droughts in the western United States, which may lead to increased tree mortality. A prevailing proximal mechanism of drought-induced tree mortality is hydraulic damage, but predicting tree mortality from hydraulic theory and climate data still remains a major scientific challenge.We used forest inventory data and a plant hydraulic model (HM) to address three questions: can we capture regional patterns of drought-induced tree mortality with HM-predicted damage thresholds; do HM metrics improve predictions of mortality across broad spatial areas; and what are the dominant controls of forest mortality when considering stand characteristics, climate metrics, and simulated hydraulic stress?We found that the amount of variance explained by models predicting mortality was limited (R 2 median = 0.10, R 2 range: 0.00-0.52). HM outputs, including hydraulic damage and carbon assimilation diagnostics, moderately improve mortality prediction across the western US compared with models using stand and climate predictors alone.Among factors considered, metrics of stand density and tree size tended to be some of the most critical factors explaining mortality, probably highlighting the important roles of structural overshoot, stand development, and biotic agent host selection and outbreaks in mortality patterns.