4.7 Article

Simulated impacts of insect defoliation on forest carbon dynamics

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS
卷 7, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/045703

关键词

defoliation; carbon budget; New Jersey Pine Barrens; ecosystem demography model; gypsy moth

资金

  1. USDA [10-JV-11242306-136]
  2. NASA [NNH08AH971]
  3. Office of Science (BER), US Department of Energy [DE-SC0007041]
  4. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0007041] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many temperate and boreal forests are subject to insect epidemics. In the eastern US, over 41 million meters squared of tree basal area are thought to be at risk of gypsy moth defoliation. However, the decadal-to-century scale implications of defoliation events for ecosystem carbon dynamics are not well understood. In this study, the effects of defoliation intensity, periodicity and spatial pattern on the carbon cycle are investigated in a set of idealized model simulations. A mechanistic terrestrial biosphere model, ecosystem demography model 2, is driven with observations from a xeric oak-pine forest located in the New Jersey Pine Barrens. Simulations indicate that net ecosystem productivity (equal to photosynthesis minus respiration) decreases linearly with increasing defoliation intensity. However, because of interactions between defoliation and drought effects, aboveground biomass exhibits a nonlinear decrease with increasing defoliation intensity. The ecosystem responds strongly with both reduced productivity and biomass loss when defoliation periodicity varies from 5 to 15 yr, but exhibits a relatively weak response when defoliation periodicity varies from 15 to 60 yr. Simulations of spatially heterogeneous defoliation resulted in markedly smaller carbon stocks than simulations with spatially homogeneous defoliation. These results show that gypsy moth defoliation has a large effect on oak-pine forest biomass dynamics, functioning and its capacity to act as a carbon sink.

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