4.7 Article

Contrasting growth responses to drought in three tree species widely distributed in northern China

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 908, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168331

Keywords

Dendroecology; Drought resistance; Drought severity; Growth recovery; Tree size

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tree species have different responses to drought, which are dependent on tree size and drought intensity.
Tree species-specific responses to drought are urgently needed for assessing the impacts of current climate change on forest ecosystems. Here, we characterized the resistance, recovery, resilience, and growth recovery periods in response to different drought events based on tree-ring width index data (>30 years) for three tree species widely distributed in northern China, among which larch (Larix principis-rupprechtii Mayr) and Mongolian pine (Pinus sylvestris L. var. mongolica Litv.) are two major species used for afforestation, and birch (Betula platyphylla Suk.) is one of the most common natural tree species. Despite no significant effects of mild drought on tree growth, severe drought events significantly reduced the growth of all species, with contrasting species-specific responses. Larch trees had the lowest resistance and resilience among the three species, and Mongolian pine trees were more resistant but had a longer recovery period than birch trees. The drought responses varied with tree size. Large Mongolian pine and birch trees were more resistant but large larch trees were much more vulnerable than small trees during severe droughts. Smaller birch trees had higher resilience to severe droughts. Our study shows species-specific differences in drought responses and suggests that drought responses are tree-size dependent and drought-intensity associated, which further provides a guidance for selecting optimal cultivated tree species and designing forest managements in this region.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available