Using climate-FVS to project landscape-level forest carbon stores for 100 years from field and LiDAR measures of initial conditions

Carbon Balance and Management

Robert F Keefe²  Nicholas L Crookston¹  John C Byrne¹  Andrew T Hudak¹  Fabián B Gálvez¹ 

[1] USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 1221 South Main St., Moscow, ID 83843, USA;Department of Forest, Rangeland, and Fire Sciences, University of Idaho, 975 West 6th St., Moscow, ID 83844-1133, USA

关键词: LiDAR;    Growth and yield;    General circulation model;    Forest vegetation simulator;    Climate change;    Carbon sequestration;   

Others  :  790482
DOI  :  10.1186/1750-0680-9-1

 received in 2013-11-02, accepted in 2014-01-14,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Forest resources supply a wide range of environmental services like mitigation of increasing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). As climate is changing, forest managers have added pressure to obtain forest resources by following stand management alternatives that are biologically sustainable and economically profitable. The goal of this study is to project the effect of typical forest management actions on forest C levels, given a changing climate, in the Moscow Mountain area of north-central Idaho, USA. Harvest and prescribed fire management treatments followed by plantings of one of four regionally important commercial tree species were simulated, using the climate-sensitive version of the Forest Vegetation Simulator, to estimate the biomass of four different planted species and their C sequestration response to three climate change scenarios.

Results

Results show that anticipated climate change induces a substantial decrease in C sequestration potential regardless of which of the four tree species tested are planted. It was also found that Pinus monticola has the highest capacity to sequester C by 2110, followed by Pinus ponderosa, then Pseudotsuga menziesii, and lastly Larix occidentalis.

Conclusions

Variability in the growth responses to climate change exhibited by the four planted species considered in this study points to the importance to forest managers of considering how well adapted seedlings may be to predicted climate change, before the seedlings are planted, and particularly if maximizing C sequestration is the management goal.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Gálvez et al.; licensee Springer.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Food Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: (FAO) Global Forest Resource Assessment. Progress Towards Sustainable Forest Management. 147, VialedelleTerme di Caracalla, Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Forestry; 2005.
• [2]Heath LS, Smith JE, Skog KE, Nowak DJ, Woodall CW: Managed forest carbon estimates for the US greenhouse gas inventory 1990–2008. J For 2010, 109:167-173.
• [3]McKinley DC, Ryan MG, Birdsey RA, Giardina CP, Harmon ME, Heath LS, Houghton RA, Jackson RB, Morrison JF, Murray BC, Pataki DE, Skog KE: A synthesis of current knowledge on forests and carbon storage in the United States. Ecol Appl 2011, 21:1902-1924.
• [4]Jackson ST, Overpeck JT: Responses of plant populations and communities to environmental changes of the late quaternary. Paleobio 2000, 26:194-220.
• [5]Iverson LR, Prasad AM: Predicting abundance of 80 tree species following climate change in the eastern United States. Ecol Monogr 1998, 68:465-485.
• [6]Tchebakova NM, Rehfeldt GE, Parfenova E: Redistribution of vegetation zones and populations of Larix sibirica Ledeb and Pinus sylvestris L. in Central Siberia in a winning climate. Sib J Ecol 2003, 10:677-686. in Russian
• [7]Monserud R, Yang Y, Huang S, Tchebakova N: Potential change in lodge pole pine site index and distribution under climatic change in Alberta. Can J For Res 2008, 38:343-352.
• [8]Crookston N, Rehfeldt G, Dixon G, Weiskittel A: Addressing climate change in the forest vegetation simulator to assess impacts on landscape forest dynamics. For Ecol Mgmt 2010, 260:1198-1211.
• [9]Rehfeldt GE, Ying CC, Spittlehouse DL, Hamilton DA: Genetic responses to climate in Pinus contorta: niche breadth, climate change, and reforestation. Ecol Monogr 1999, 69:375-407.
• [10]Rehfeldt GE, Crookston NL, Warwell MV, Evans JS: Empirical analyses of plant–climate relationships for the western United States. Int J Plant Sci 2006, 167:1123-1150.
• [11]Messaoud Y, Chen HYH: The influence of recent climate change on tree height growth differs with species and spatial environment. PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e14691. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014691
• [12]Running SW, Coughlan JC: A general model of forest ecosystem processes for regional applications I. Hydrologic balance, canopy gas exchange and primary production processes. Ecol Mod 1988, 42:125-154.
• [13]Running SW, Gower ST: FOREST-BGC, A general model of forest ecosystem processes for regional applications. II. Dynamic carbon allocation and nitrogen budgets. Tree Physiol 1991, 9:147-160.
• [14]Chen M, Zhuang Q: Spatially explicit parameterization of a terrestrial ecosystem model and its application to the quantification of carbon dynamics of forest ecosystems in the conterminous United States. Earth Interactions 2012, 16:1-22.
• [15]Landsberg JJ, Waring RH: A generalized model of forest productivity using simplified concepts of radiation use efficiency, carbon balance and partitioning. For Ecol Mgmt 1997, 95:209-228.
• [16]Coops NC, Waring RH, Landsberg JJ: Assessing forest productivity in Australia and New Zealand using a physiologically-based model driven with averaged monthly weather data and satellite derived estimates of canopy photosynthetic capacity. For Ecol Mgmt 1998, 104:113-127.
• [17]Bachelet D, Lenihan JM, Daly C, Neilson RP, Ojima DS, Parton WJ: MC1: a dynamic vegetation model for estimating the distribution of vegetation and associated carbon, nutrients, and water—technical documentation. Version 1.0. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-508. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station; 2001:95.
• [18]Neilson RP: A model for predicting continental-scale vegetation distribution and water balance. Ecol App 1995, 5:362-385.
• [19]Parton WJ, Schimel DS, Cole CV, Ojima DS: Analysis of factors controlling soil organic matter levels in Great Plains grasslands. Soil Sci Soc Amer Jrnl 1987, 51:1173-1179.
• [20]Harmon ME, Marks B: Effects of silvicultural treatments on carbon stores in forest stands. Can J For Res 2002, 32:863-877.
• [21]Mladenoff DJ: LANDIS and forest landscape models. Ecol l Mod 2004, 180:7-19.
• [22]Scheller RM, Domingo JB, Sturtevant BR, Williams JS, Rudy A, Gustafson EJ, Mladenoff DJ: Design, development, and application of LANDIS-II, a spatial landscape simulation model with flexible spatial and temporal resolution. Ecol Mod 2007, 201:409-419.
• [23]Hummel S, Hudak AT, Uebler EH, Falkowski MJ, Megown KA: A comparison of accuracy and cost of LiDAR versus stand exam data for landscape management on the Malheur National Forest. J For 2011, 109:267-273.
• [24]Crookston NL, Dixon GE: The forest vegetation simulator: a review of its structure, content, and applications. Comput Electron Agric 2005, 49:60-80.
• [25]Dixon GE: (Comp.) Essential FVS: A user’s guide to the forest vegetation simulator. Internal Report. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Management Service Center; 2008:189.
• [26]Rehfeldt G, Crookston N, Saenz- Romero C, Campbell E: North American vegetation model for land-use planning in a changing climate: a solution to large classification problems. Ecol Appl 2012, 22:119-141.
• [27]Goetz S, Dubayah R: Advances in remote sensing technology and implications for measuring and monitoring forest carbon stocks and change. Carb Mgmt 2011, 2:231-244.
• [28]Hudak A, Evans J, Smith A: LiDAR utility for natural resource managers. Rem Sens 2009, 1:934-951.
• [29]Hudak A, Strand E, Vierling L, Byrne J, Eitel J, Martinuzzi S, Falkowski M: Quantifying above forest carbon pools and fluxes from repeat LiDAR surveys. Rem Sens Environ 2012, 123:25-40.
• [30]Buma B, Wessman CA: Forest resilience, climate change, and opportunities for adaptation: a specific case of a general problem. For Ecol Mgmt 2013, 306:216-225.
• [31]Daubenmire R: Vegetation: identification of typal communities. Science 1966, 151:291-298.
• [32]Cooper SV, Neiman KE, Roberts DW: Forest habitat types of northern Idaho: A second approximation. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-236. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station; 1991:143.
• [33]Kimsey MJ Jr, Garrison-Johnston MT, Johnson L: Characterization of volcanic ash-influenced forest soils across a geoclimatic sequence. Soil Sci Soc Am J 2011, 75:267-279.
• [34]Evans JS, Hudak A: A multi scale curvature algorithm for classifying discrete return lidar in forested environments. IEEE Trans Geosci Rem Sens 2007, 4:1029-1038.
• [35]Eskelson BNI, Temesgen H, LeMay V, Barrett TM, Crookston NL, Hudak AT: The roles of nearest neighbor methods in imputing missing data in forest inventory and monitoring databases. Scand J For Res 2009, 24:235-246.
• [36]USDA Forest Service: Climate-FVS Ready Data. Moscow, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Forestry Science Laboratory; 2013. http://forest.moscowfsl.wsu.edu/climate/customData/fvs_data.php webcite. (accessed November 2012)
• [37]Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Summary for policymakers: emissions scenarios. Special report of IPCC working group III 2000; 21.
• [38]USDA Forest Service: FVS Training Guide. NFS-Northern Region. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Management Service Center; 2011:128.
• [39]Rehfeldt GE, Jaquish BC: Ecological impacts and management strategies for western larch in the face of climate-change. Mitig Adapt Strat Global Change 2010, 15:283-306.
• [40]Williams MI, Dumroese RK: Preparing for climate change: forestry and assisted migration. J For 2013, 111:287-297.
• [41]Mátyás C: Modeling climate change effects with provenance test data. Tree Physiol 1994, 14:797-804.
• [42]Halofsky JE, Hemstrom MA, Conklin DR, Halofsky JS, Kerns BK, Bachelet D: Assessing potential climate change effects on vegetation using a linked model approach. Ecol Mod 2013, 266:131-143.