Forests, savannas, and grasslands: bridging the knowledge gap between ecology and Dynamic Global Vegetation Models
-
Published:2015-03-20
Issue:6
Volume:12
Page:1833-1848
-
ISSN:1726-4189
-
Container-title:Biogeosciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Biogeosciences
Author:
Baudena M.ORCID, Dekker S. C.ORCID, van Bodegom P. M.ORCID, Cuesta B., Higgins S. I., Lehsten V., Reick C. H., Rietkerk M., Scheiter S.ORCID, Yin Z., Zavala M. A., Brovkin V.
Abstract
Abstract. The forest, savanna, and grassland biomes, and the transitions between them, are expected to undergo major changes in the future due to global climate change. Dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) are very useful for understanding vegetation dynamics under the present climate, and for predicting its changes under future conditions. However, several DGVMs display high uncertainty in predicting vegetation in tropical areas. Here we perform a comparative analysis of three different DGVMs (JSBACH, LPJ-GUESS-SPITFIRE and aDGVM) with regard to their representation of the ecological mechanisms and feedbacks that determine the forest, savanna, and grassland biomes, in an attempt to bridge the knowledge gap between ecology and global modeling. The outcomes of the models, which include different mechanisms, are compared to observed tree cover along a mean annual precipitation gradient in Africa. By drawing on the large number of recent studies that have delivered new insights into the ecology of tropical ecosystems in general, and of savannas in particular, we identify two main mechanisms that need improved representation in the examined DGVMs. The first mechanism includes water limitation to tree growth, and tree–grass competition for water, which are key factors in determining savanna presence in arid and semi-arid areas. The second is a grass–fire feedback, which maintains both forest and savanna presence in mesic areas. Grasses constitute the majority of the fuel load, and at the same time benefit from the openness of the landscape after fires, since they recover faster than trees. Additionally, these two mechanisms are better represented when the models also include tree life stages (adults and seedlings), and distinguish between fire-prone and shade-tolerant forest trees, and fire-resistant and shade-intolerant savanna trees. Including these basic elements could improve the predictive ability of the DGVMs, not only under current climate conditions but also and especially under future scenarios.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
Earth-Surface Processes,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference99 articles.
1. Archibald, S., Roy, D., van Wilgen, B., and Scholes, R. J.: What limits fire? An examination of drivers of burnt area in Southern Africa, Glob. Chang. Biol., 15, 613–630, 2009. 2. Arneth, A., Lehsten, V., Spessa, A., and Thonicke, K.: Climate-fire interactions and savanna ecosystems: a dynamic vegetation modelling study for the African continent, in: Ecosystem Function in Savannas: Measurement and Modeling at Landscape to Global Scales, edited by: Hill, M. J. and Hanan, N. P., CRC Press, 463–479, 2010. 3. Baudena, M. and Rietkerk, M.: Complexity and coexistence in a simple spatial model for arid savanna ecosystems, Theor. Ecol., 6, 131–141, 2013. 4. Baudena, M., D'Andrea, F., and Provenzale, A.: An idealized model for tree–grass coexistence in savannas: the role of life stage structure and fire disturbances, J. Ecol., 98, 74–80, 2010. 5. Beerling, D. J. and Osborne, C. P.: The origin of the savanna biome, Glob. Chang. Biol., 12, 2023–2031, 2006.
Cited by
96 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|