4.8 Article

Net ecosystem productivity of boreal jack pine stands regenerating from clearcutting under current and future climates

期刊

GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY
卷 13, 期 7, 页码 1423-1440

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01363.x

关键词

clearcutting; climate change; ecosys; forest regeneration; modelling; net biome productivity; net ecosystem productivity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Life cycle analysis of climate and disturbance effects on forest net ecosystem productivity (NEP) is necessary to assess changes in forest carbon (C) stocks under current or future climates. Ecosystem models used in such assessments need to undergo well-constrained tests of their hypotheses for climate and disturbance effects on the processes that determine CO2 exchange between forests and the atmosphere. We tested the ability of the model ecosys to simulate diurnal changes in CO2 fluxes under changing air temperatures (T-a) and soil water contents during forest regeneration with eddy covariance measurements over boreal jack pine (Pinus banksiana) stands along a postclearcut chronosequence. Model hypotheses for hydraulic and nutrient constraints on C02 fixation allowed ecosys to simulate the recovery of C cycling during the transition of boreal jack pine stands from C sources following clearcutting (NEP from -150 to -200 g Cm(-2)yr(-1)) to C sinks at maturity (NEP from 20 to 80gCm(-2)yr(-1)) with large interannual variability. Over a 126-year logging cycle, annualized NEP, C harvest, and net biome productivity (NBP = NEP-harvest removals) of boreal jack pine averaged 47, 33 and 14 g Cm(-2)yr(-1). Under an IPCC SIZES climate change scenario, rising T,, exacerbated hydraulic constraints that adversely affected NEP of boreal jack pine after 75 years. These adverse effects were avoided in the model by replacing the boreal jack pine ecotype with one adapted to warmer T-a.. This replacement raised annualized NEP, C harvest, and NBP to 81, 56 and 25gCm(-2)yr(-1) during a 126-year logging cycle under the same climate change scenario.

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

4.8
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