Ecosystem resilience despite large-scale altered hydroclimatic conditions

Campos, Guillermo E. Ponce; Moran, M. Susan; Huete, Alfredo; Zhang, Yongguang; Bresloff, Cynthia J.; Huxman, Travis E.; Eamus, Derek; Bosch, David D.; Buda, Anthony R.; Gunter, S. A.; Scalley, Tamara Heartsill; Kitchen, Stanley G.; McClaran, Mitchel P.; McNab, W. Henry; Montoya, Diane S.; Morgan, Jack A.; Peters, Debra P. C.; Sadler, E. J.; Seyfried, M. S.; Starks, Patrick J.

doi:10.1038/nature11836

Cited by 463 publications

(343 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

317

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At the community level, both intra-and inter-specific variations in plant traits are important sources of ecosystem functioning stability (Loreau and de Mazancourt, 2013), which might be restricted by long-term climatic stresses because only those species with particular similar traits can survive in severe environments. At the ecosystem level, with the increase of water stress, the apparent water use efficiency (WUE) gradually approaches to the intrinsic WUE, which can be retained in prolonged drought conditions across all biomes, resulting in a convergent WUE and a small CnBE (Huxman et al, 2004;Ponce-Campos et al, 2013).…”

Section: Relative Contribution Of Be To the Iav In C Fluxes At The Ecmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biotic and climatic controls on interannual variability in carbon fluxes across terrestrial ecosystems

Shao

Zhou

Luo

et al. 2015

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tInterannual variability (IAV, represented by standard deviation) in net ecosystem exchange of CO 2 (NEE) is mainly driven by climatic drivers and biotic variations (i.e., the changes in photosynthetic and respiratory responses to climate), the effects of which are referred to as climatic (CE) and biotic effects (BE), respectively. Evaluating the relative contributions of CE and BE to the IAV in carbon (C) fluxes and understanding their controlling mechanisms are critical in projecting ecosystem changes in the future climate. In this study, we applied statistical methods with flux data from 65 sites located in the Northern Hemisphere to address this issue. Our results showed that the relative contribution of BE (CnBE) and CE (CnCE) to the IAV in NEE was 57% ± 14% and 43% ± 14%, respectively. The discrepancy in the CnBE among sites could be largely explained by water balance index (WBI). Across water-stressed ecosystems, the CnBE decreased with increasing aridity (slope = 0.18% mm −1 ). In addition, the CnBE tended to increase and the uncertainty reduced as timespan of available data increased from 5 to 15 years. Inter-site variation of the IAV in NEE mainly resulted from the IAV in BE (72%) compared to that in CE (37%). Interestingly, positive correlations between BE and CE occurred in grasslands and dry ecosystems (r > 0.45, P < 0.05) but not in other ecosystems. These results highlighted the importance of BE in determining the IAV in NEE and the ability of ecosystems to regulate C fluxes under climate change might decline when the ecosystems experience more severe water stress in the future.

show abstract

Section: Relative Contribution Of Be To the Iav In C Fluxes At The Ecmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biotic and climatic controls on interannual variability in carbon fluxes across terrestrial ecosystems

Shao

Zhou

Luo

et al. 2015

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One possible explanation is that, currently, atmospheric CO 2 concentration is still below a level that would buffer impacts of heatwaves or droughts. In general, establishing relationships between vegetation activity, water availability and climatic changes remains a complicated task Ponce Campos et al, 2013), not least because land use changes interfere with such correlations (de Jong et al, 2013). Also, there are many factors that limit plants' response to CO 2 rise (see below), including nutrient limitations and year-to-year variability of precipitation (Newingham et al, 2013) -although flux measurements and satellite observations now suggest that such responses are already happening in many environments (Donohue et al, 2013;Keenan et al, 2013).…”

Section: Water Limitation Of Terrestrial Net Primary Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A vital link: water and vegetation in the Anthropocene

Gerten

2013

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper argues that the interplay of water, carbon and vegetation dynamics fundamentally links some global trends in the current and conceivable future Anthropocene, such as cropland expansion, freshwater use, and climate change and its impacts. Based on a review of recent literature including geographically explicit simulation studies with the process-based LPJmL global biosphere model, it demonstrates that the connectivity of water and vegetation dynamics is vital for water security, food security and (terrestrial) ecosystem dynamics alike. The water limitation of net primary production of both natural and agricultural plantsalready pronounced in many regions -is shown to increase in many places under projected climate change, though this development is partially offset by water-saving direct CO 2 effects. Natural vegetation can to some degree adapt dynamically to higher water limitation, but agricultural crops usually require some form of active management to overcome it -among them irrigation, soil conservation and eventually shifts of cropland to areas that are less water-limited due to more favourable climatic conditions. While crucial to secure food production for a growing world population, such human interventions in water-vegetation systems have, as also shown, repercussions on the water cycle. Indeed, land use changes are shown to be the second-most important influence on the terrestrial water balance in recent times. Furthermore, climate change (warming and precipitation changes) will in many regions increase irrigation demand and decrease water availability, impeding rainfed and irrigated food production (if not CO 2 effects counterbalance this impact -which is unlikely at least in poorly managed systems). Drawing from these exemplary investigations, some research perspectives on how to further improve our knowledge of human-watervegetation interactions in the Anthropocene are outlined.

show abstract

“…A total of 230 scenes (23 scenes × 10 years) was obtained for each of the 12 sites. In order to eliminate the noise of low-quality, cloud-and aerosol-contaminated pixels, a pixelbased quality assurance (QA) control was applied to generate a less noisy time series data set based on the quality flag in MOD13Q1 product (Ponce-Campos et al, 2013). Then the software TIMESAT was used to smooth the QA-filtered time series of EVI as well as to estimate the vegetation parameters such as EVI integrals of the growing season (Jönsson and Eklundlh, 2004).…”

Section: Satellite Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrasting responses of terrestrial ecosystem production to hot temperature extreme regimes between grassland and forest

Zhang¹,

Voigt²,

Liu

2015

Biogeosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. During the past several decades, observational data have shown a faster increase in hot temperature extremes than the change in mean temperature. Increasingly high extreme temperatures are expected to affect terrestrial ecosystem function. The ecological impact of hot extremes on vegetation production, however, remains uncertain across biomes in natural climatic conditions. In this study, we investigated the effects of hot temperature extremes on vegetation production by combining the MODIS enhanced vegetation index (EVI) data set and in situ climatic records during the period 2000 to 2009 from 12 long-term experimental sites across biomes and climate. Our results show that higher mean annual maximum temperatures (T max ) greatly reduced grassland production, and yet enhanced forest production after removing the effect of precipitation. The relative decrease in vegetation production was 16 % for arid grassland and 7 % for mesic grassland, and the increase was 5 % for forest. We also observed a significantly positive relationship between interannual aboveground net primary production (ANPP) and T max for the forest biome (R 2 = 0.79, P < 0.001). This line of evidence suggests that hot temperature extremes lead to contrasting ecosystem-level responses of vegetation production between grassland and forest biomes. Given that many terrestrial ecosystem models use average daily temperature as input, predictions of ecosystem production should consider such contrasting responses to increasingly hot temperature extreme regimes associated with climate change.

show abstract

Ecosystem resilience despite large-scale altered hydroclimatic conditions

Cited by 463 publications

References 22 publications

Biotic and climatic controls on interannual variability in carbon fluxes across terrestrial ecosystems

Biotic and climatic controls on interannual variability in carbon fluxes across terrestrial ecosystems

A vital link: water and vegetation in the Anthropocene

Contrasting responses of terrestrial ecosystem production to hot temperature extreme regimes between grassland and forest

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About