We synthesize insights from current understanding of drought impacts at stand to biogeographic scales, including management options, and we identify challenges to be addressed with new research. Large stand-level shifts underway in western forests already are showing the importance of interactions involving drought, insects, and fire. Diebacks, changes in composition and structure, and shifting range limits are widely observed. In the eastern US, the effects of increasing drought are becoming better understood at the level of individual trees, but this knowledge cannot yet be confidently translated to predictions of changing structure and diversity of forest stands. While eastern forests have not experienced the types of changes seen in western forests in recent decades, they too are vulnerable to drought and could experience significant changes with increased severity, frequency, or duration in drought. Throughout the continental United States, the combination of projected large climate-induced shifts in suitable habitat from modeling studies and limited potential for the rapid migration of tree populations suggests that changing tree and forest biogeography could substantially lag habitat shifts already underway.Forest management practices can partially ameliorate drought impacts through reductions in stand density, selection of drought-tolerant species and genotypes, artificial regeneration, and the development of multi-structured stands. However, silvicultural treatments also could exacerbate drought impacts unless implemented with careful attention to site and stand characteristics. Gaps in our understanding should motivate new research on the effects of interactions involving climate and other species at the stand scale and how interactions and multiple responses are represented in models. This assessment indicates that, without a stronger empirical basis for drought impacts at the stand scale, more complex models may provide limited guidance.

High biodiversity of forests is not predicted by traditional models, and evidence for trade‐offs those models require is limited. High‐dimensional regulation (e.g., N factors to regulate N species) has long been recognized as a possible alternative explanation, but it has not be been seriously pursued, because only a few limiting resources are evident for trees, and analysis of multiple interactions is challenging. We develop a hierarchical model that allows us to synthesize data from long‐term, experimental, data sets with processes that control growth, maturation, fecundity, and survival. We allow for uncertainty at all stages and variation among 26 000 individuals and over time, including 268 000 tree years, for dozens of tree species. We estimate population‐level parameters that apply at the species level and the interactions among latent states, i.e., the demographic rates for each individual, every year. The former show that the traditional trade‐offs used to explain diversity are not present. Demographic rates overlap among species, and they do not show trends consistent with maintenance of diversity by simple mechanisms (negative correlations and limiting similarity). However, estimates of latent states at the level of individuals and years demonstrate that species partition environmental variation. Correlations between responses to variation in time are high for individuals of the same species, but not for individuals of different species. We demonstrate that these relationships are pervasive, providing strong evidence that high‐dimensional regulation is critical for biodiversity regulation.

Forest responses to climate change will depend on demographic impacts in the context of competition. Current models used to predict species responses, termed climate envelope models (CEMs), are controversial, because (i) calibration and prediction are based on correlations in space (CIS) between species abundance and climate, rather than responses to climate change over time (COT), and (ii) they omit competition. To determine the relative importance of COT, CIS, and competition for light, we applied a longitudinal analysis of 27 000 individual trees over 6-18 years subjected to experimental and natural variation in risk factors. Sensitivities and climate and resource tracking identify which species are vulnerable to these risk factors and in what ways. Results show that responses to COT differ from those predicted based on CIS. The most important impact is the effect of spring temperature on fecundity, rather than any input variable on growth or survival. Of secondary importance is growing season moisture. Species in the genera Pinus, Ulmus, Magnolia, and Fagus are particularly vulnerable to climate variation. However, the effect of competition on growth and mortality risk exceeds the effects of climate variation in space or time for most species. Because sensitivities to COT and competition are larger than CIS, current models miss the most important effects. By directly comparing sensitivity to climate in time and space, together with competition, the approach identifies which species are sensitive to climate change and why, including the heretofore overlooked impact on fecundity.