2020
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-71055-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Increasing the broad-leaved tree fraction in European forests mitigates hot temperature extremes

Abstract: Forests influence climate through a myriad of chemical, physical and biological processes and are an essential lever in the efforts to counter climate change. The majority of studies investigating potential climate benefits from forests have focused on forest area changes, while changes to forest management, in particular those affecting species composition, have received much less attention. Using a statistical model based on remote sensing observations over europe, we show that broadleaved tree species local… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
(89 reference statements)
1
23
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Our analysis of remote-sensing based LST profits from high spatial resolution and geographic coverage but is limited by temporal resolution. A low temporal resolution and early observation time (around 10:15 a.m.) leads to increased uncertainties particularly when predicting LULC temperature differences during hot extremes for which ideally highly resolved temporal data should be used 51 . In addition, remote sensing LST data is mainly derived during cloud-free conditions 52 , and hence it is rather impossible to infer LST differences between vegetated land and urban fabric during cloudy conditions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our analysis of remote-sensing based LST profits from high spatial resolution and geographic coverage but is limited by temporal resolution. A low temporal resolution and early observation time (around 10:15 a.m.) leads to increased uncertainties particularly when predicting LULC temperature differences during hot extremes for which ideally highly resolved temporal data should be used 51 . In addition, remote sensing LST data is mainly derived during cloud-free conditions 52 , and hence it is rather impossible to infer LST differences between vegetated land and urban fabric during cloudy conditions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The models were fitted using the package mgcv 80 embedded in the R computing environment 81 . GAMs can be used to estimate temperatures based on a variety of predictor variables and hence can account for potential confounding factors, which has shown to be very relevant in the analysis of LULC temperature impacts 6 , 51 . All GAMs are calibrated including LST observations as response variable and several predictor variables (Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We observed that forest resilience indices differed in areas affected by contrasting levels of thermal exposure during extreme heatwave events. Thermal buffering and amplification effects during extreme heatwave events remain still poorly described in Mediterranean ecosystems and elsewhere (Carnicer, Stefanescu, et al., 2019; Frey et al., 2016; Schwaab et al., 2020). In this paper we report a first detailed description of the modulation of the thermal exposure in tree saplings during an unprecedented extreme summer heatwave event, based on detailed field measurements (van Oldenborgh et al., 2019; Zhao et al., 2020).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7) with a Generalized Additive Model (GAM) to infer the contribution of LC on the spatial distribution of precipitation (Extended Data Table 1). Statistical models were successfully used as a tool to assess both local 32 and remote 33 temperature changes induced by LCC. For the GAM presented here, we consider topographic effects, which strongly modulate the spatial distribution of precipitation 34 , by including a number of topographic metrics as predictors (Supplementary Fig.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%