Do limited cold tolerance and shallow depth of roots contribute to yellow-cedar decline?

Schaberg, Paul G.; D’Amore, D. V.; Hennon, Paul E.; Halman, Joshua M.; Hawley, Gary J.

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2011.08.004

Cited by 35 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We proposed an adaptation sucb tbat cedars rely on the linked uptake of nitrate anions with calcium cations to exploit sballow, rieb sources of nitrogen (D'Amore et al 2009). A nutritional analysis of tbe foliage also indicated that yellow-cedar takes up more calcium (concentrated in upper organic soil horizons) and less aluminum (concentrated in deeper mineral borizons) tban other sympatric conifers, whicb supports the possibility that yellow-cedar has a greater proportion of shallow fine roots than many of its competitors (Schaberg et al 2011). Along with anoxia, this adaptation for enhanced nitrate uptake leads to sballow rooting and predisposes yellow-cedar to an increased risk of injury from near-surface soil-temperature fluctuations.…”

Section: Interdisciplinary Research To Evaluate the Complex Of Causalmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…Importantly, the progression of injury followed the sequences of symptoms for mature trees documented in the field, starting with root mortality in the winter and early spring, then foliar damage, and eventually whole-plant mortality when the injured roots were incapable of supplying the foliage with water and other resources (Hennon et al 1990b). We tested the hypothesis that yellow-cedar had unique freezing vulnerability by measuring the fine-root cold hardiness of yellow-cedar and four other sympatric conifers growing together in a mixed stand from the fall to the spring (Schaberg et al 2011). Across all dates, yellow-cedar roots were less cold tolerant than those of the other species (Schaberg et al 2011).…”

Section: Interdisciplinary Research To Evaluate the Complex Of Causalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shifting Climate, Altered Niche, and a Dynamic Conservation Strategy for Yellow-Cedar in the North Pacific Coastal Rainforest

Hennon¹,

D’Amore²,

Schaberg³

et al. 2012

BioScience

Self Cite

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extensive mortality of yellow-cedar along more than ¡000 kilometers of the northern Pacific coast of North America serves as a leading example of climate effects on a forest tree species. In this article, we document our approaches to resolving the causes of tree death, which we explain as a cascade of interacting topographic, forest-structure, and microclimate factors that act on a unique vulnerability of yellow-cedar to fine-root freezing. The complex causes of tree mortality are reduced to two risk factors-snow depth and soil drainage-which are then used to model present and future cedar habitat suitability. We propose a dynamic, comprehensive conservation strategy for this valuable species on the basis of zones created by shifting climate, cedar's ecological niche, and observed risk factors. Research on yellow-cedar decline is offered as a template for understanding and adapting to climate change for other climate-forest issues.

show abstract

Section: Interdisciplinary Research To Evaluate the Complex Of Causalmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Interdisciplinary Research To Evaluate the Complex Of Causalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shifting Climate, Altered Niche, and a Dynamic Conservation Strategy for Yellow-Cedar in the North Pacific Coastal Rainforest

Hennon¹,

D’Amore²,

Schaberg³

et al. 2012

BioScience

Self Cite

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yellow-cedar decline is linked to late winter/early spring warming events that are followed by extended freezing temperatures . Yellow-cedar undergoes dehardening of its roots during warming periods that leave roots susceptible to freezing events (Schaberg et al, 2005(Schaberg et al, , 2008(Schaberg et al, , 2011D'Amore and Hennon, 2006;Hennon et al 2016). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No evidence of recent (1995–2013) decrease of yellow-cedar in Alaska

Barrett

Pattison

2017

Can. J. For. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change is expected to impact forests worldwide, and yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis (D. Don) Oerst. ex D.P. Little) decline has been used as an example of how changing climate can impact a tree species. However, most previous research has not placed yellow-cedar decline within the context of yellow-cedar overall. We used a 2004–2013 regional inventory of the temperate rainforest of Alaska (671 plots with yellow-cedar) to estimate current attributes and a subset of 564 remeasured plots (established 1995–1998) to estimate recent change. Results show that in unmanaged forests, yellow-cedar live tree basal area recently (1995–1998 to 2004–2013) increased, with a 95% confidence interval of a 0.3% to 3.3% increase per decade. Yellow-cedar has a relatively low mortality rate, 0.41% of trees per year. An analysis of live tree to snag ratios was consistent with elevated mortality of yellow-cedar prior to 1995 but also indicated that little range contraction had occurred. The large numbers and wide geographic range of yellow-cedar trees in Alaska and the recent (1995–2013) stability in the monitored population serve as important contextual information for yellow-cedar decline. This research also illustrates that understanding the spatial and temporal complexities of how tree species respond to climate change will be improved if focused studies are accompanied by regional monitoring.

show abstract

“…Others have been very successful using GPR to detect frost after snow removal (Steelman and Endres, 2009;Steelman et al, 2010). However, in ecological monitoring, snow removal is undesirable due to its impact on nutrient cycling, root health and possible tree mortality (e.g., Comerford et al, 2013;Schaberg et al, 2011). Tree roots are often more susceptible to freezing damage than more cold hardy above ground components (Tierney et al, 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%