4.6 Article

Increased aridity drives post-fire recovery of Mediterranean forests towards open shrublands

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 225, 期 4, 页码 1500-1515

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nph.16252

关键词

alternative stable states; climate change; forest fires; increased aridity; Mediterranean shrubland; resprouters; seeders; stochastic dynamical model

资金

  1. European Union's Seventh Framework Program (FP7/2007-2013) [283068]
  2. EU [GA660859]
  3. project DRYEX2 - Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [CGL2017-89804-R]
  4. 'Beatriu de Pinos' fellowship [2014BP-B-00056]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent observations suggest that repeated fires could drive Mediterranean forests to shrublands, hosting flammable vegetation that regrows quickly after fire. This feedback supposedly favours shrubland persistence and may be strengthened in the future by predicted increased aridity. An assessment was made of how fires and aridity in combination modulated the dynamics of Mediterranean ecosystems and whether the feedback could be strong enough to maintain shrubland as an alternative stable state to forest. A model was developed for vegetation dynamics, including stochastic fires and different plant fire-responses. Parameters were calibrated using observational data from a period up to 100 yr ago, from 77 sites with and without fires in Southeast Spain and Southern France. The forest state was resilient to the separate impact of fires and increased aridity. However, water stress could convert forests into open shrublands by hampering post-fire recovery, with a possible tipping point at intermediate aridity. Projected increases in aridity may reduce the resilience of Mediterranean forests against fires and drive post-fire ecosystem dynamics toward open shrubland. The main effect of increased aridity is the limitation of post-fire recovery. Including plant fire-responses is thus fundamental when modelling the fate of Mediterranean-type vegetation under climate-change scenarios.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据