4.7 Article

Can forest management be used to sustain water-based ecosystem services in the face of climate change?

期刊

ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS
卷 21, 期 6, 页码 2049-2067

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1890/10-2246.1

关键词

climate; Coweeta basin, southern Appalachians, USA; drought risk; forest management; land use; paired watershed; precipitation; streamflow; warming; water supply

资金

  1. USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station
  2. USDA Forest Service
  3. Division Of Environmental Biology
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences [823293] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Forested watersheds, an important provider of ecosystems services related to water supply, can have their structure, function, and resulting streamflow substantially altered by land use and land cover. Using a retrospective analysis and synthesis of long-term climate and streamflow data (75 years) from six watersheds differing in management histories we explored whether streamflow responded differently to variation in annual temperature and extreme precipitation than unmanaged watersheds. We show significant increases in temperature and the frequency of extreme wet and dry years since the 1980s. Response models explained almost all streamflow variability (adjusted R-2 > 0.99). In all cases, changing land use altered streamflow. Observed watershed responses differed significantly in wet and dry extreme years in all but a stand managed as a coppice forest. Converting deciduous stands to pine altered the streamflow response to extreme annual precipitation the most; the apparent frequency of observed extreme wet years decreased on average by sevenfold. This increased soil water storage may reduce flood risk in wet years, but create conditions that could exacerbate drought. Forest management can potentially mitigate extreme annual precipitation associated with climate change; however, offsetting effects suggest the need for spatially explicit analyses of risk and vulnerability.

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

4.7
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