bnz lter program role in the national lter network lter network decadal plan 2009 lter all...
Post on 12-Jan-2016
222 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
BNZ LTER Program Role in the National LTER Network
LTER Network Decadal Plan
2009 LTER All Scientists Meeting
LTER Network Decadal PlanIntegrated Science for Science and the Environment
(aka ISSE)
Three Themes1. Land and Water Use Change – the dynamics of urban,
exurban, and working systems2. Climate Change, Variability, and Extreme Events3. Nutrient Mobilization and Species Introductions
Funding MechanismsNo ISSE ProgramULTRALTER Working Group Proposals (8) – CNHScience Council to develop cross network initiativesAugmentation of NSF LTER Budget
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Regulating: Nutrient filtration, nutrient retention, C sequestration, disease regulation
Provisioning: food and fiber production,
Cultural: aesthetics & recreation
ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONFlux, transport, storage,
transformation, stoichiometry,
productivity
COMMUNITY STRUCTUREVegetation turnover time
Trophic structureMicrobial communities
PULSES: Fire, drought, storms; dust events, pulse nutrient inputs; fertilization
PRESSES: Climate change; nutrient loading; sea-level rise; increased human resource use
HUMAN BEHAVIOR
RegulationMarkets
MigrationInstitutional
Q4Q3
Q2Q1
HUMAN OUTCOMES
Exposure riskQuality of lifeHuman health
Perception and value
Q4b
Geophysical Template
Socio-cultural-economic Template
Q4a
Q5
External drivers earthquake, tsunami
LTER Network Decadal PlanIntegrated Science for Science and the Environment
(aka ISSE)
Three Themes1. Land and Water Use Change – the dynamics of urban,
exurban, and working systems2. Climate Change, Variability, and Extreme Events3. Nutrient Mobilization and Species Introductions
Funding MechanismsNo ISSE ProgramULTRALTER Working Group Proposals (8) – CNHScience Council to develop cross network initiativesAugmentation of NSF LTER Budget
2009 LTER All Scientists Meeting
Integrating Science and Society in an Ever-Changing World
September 14-16, 2009 at YMCA of the Rockies, Estes Park, Colorado
Important DatesMarch 4– second call, including preliminary program March 9 – Information to sites on funding March 22 – working group submission opens April 1 – housing reservations open May 1 – poster submission opens June 1 – meeting registration opens June 15 – housing reservations close; room block released July 1 –working group and poster submissions close August 15 – final program
Discussion IssuesGraduate Student Symposium on 13 SeptemberILTER Meeting on Ecosystem Services on 12 and 13 SeptemberSome funding for travel provided by the LTER Network OfficeWorking Groups
BNZ LTER Synthesis Issue of Canadian Journal of Forest
Research (CJFR)
Title: The Dynamics of Change in Alaska’s Boreal Forests: Resilience and Vulnerability in Response to Climate Warming
Climate Sensitivity and Resilience/Vulnerability
Response of White Spruce Growth to Climate (McGuire et al.)
Response of Stream Flow to Climate (Jones et al.)
Response of Permafrost and Effects of Ecosystems (Jorgensen et al.)
Changing Moss Communities (Turetsky et al.)
Climate Variability and Snow Shoe Hare Population Cycles (Kielland et al.)
Long term response of stream flow to climatic warming in headwater streams of interior Alaska (Jones and Rinehart)
Overview:
• With climatic warming and permafrost thaw, flowpaths through watersheds underlain by permafrost will likely change
• Predicted shift towards greater base flow contributions to stream flow and less flashy storm hydrographs
• Objectives of research to synthesize patterns in stream flow hydrographs over 29 year record for three headwater streams draining watersheds with varying extents of underlying permafrost.
Factors Affecting Permafrost Degradation
Topography• Insolation• Runoff• Lapse Rate• Snowfall
Surface Water• albedo• convective heat
Ground Water• advective heat
Soil Texture• Peat vs Gravel vs Silt• Drainage• Moisture• Thermal properties
Vegetation• Albedo• Shading• Insulation• Snow Interception
Loess
Perm
afro
st
Gravel RiverbedThick Peat
Retransported Silt
Bedrock
Stratified Silt and Sand
Thaw Lake
Ground Ice• Thaw settlement
Consequences of Permafrost Degradation
• Hydrologic reorganization• Stream export changes (sediment, DOC)• Soil carbon sequestration or loss• Trace gas emissions• Habitat shifts• Habitat use and wildlife abundance• Infrastructure Damage• Overland transport
Approximately 70% of Interior Alaska susceptible to permafrost loss
1) Use meta-analysis to address key assumptions about moss and boreal ecosystem
• Moss vs. vascular NPP• Moss vs. vascular decomposition• Changing moss abundance with N, temp, fire
2) Apply insight to understand implications of changing moss abundance across LTER sites
Goals for synthesis chapter
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
De
nsi
ty (
ha
res
ha
-1)
0
2
4
6
8
10
Hare cycle on Riparian trap grid BNZ LTER 1998-2008
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Jun Aug Nov
Po
pu
lati
on
siz
e
SpruceM0
SpruceMhRipM0
RipMh
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Su
rviv
al
Rip(S)
Spruce(S)
Kaplan-Meier survival estimatesRemains of lynx-killed snowshoe hare
Disturbance, Successional Dynamics in Resilience/Vulnerability
Changing Plant Communities in Floodplain Turning Points (Hollingsworth et al.)
Forest Growth Dynamics in Upland and Floodplain Turning Points (Yarie et al.)
Spatial and Temporal Structure of Fungal Communities (Taylor et al.)
Alaska’s Changing Fire Regime (Kasischke et al.)
Fire and Resilience (Johnstone et al.)
Fire, Trees, and Nitrogen (Mack et al.)
Insect and Pathogen Disturbance Regimes (Juday et al.)
Research Questions (Hollingsworth)
• Are there identifiable understory turning points that mirror the overstory changes in succession?
• Have changes in climate been manifested in unexpected understory vegetation changes?
MethodsIntroductionResults:
CoverResults: Composition
Conclusions
a
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Cu
mu
lati
ve B
as
al
Are
a G
row
th (
cm2
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Sugar
Control
Sawdust
Fertilizer
Drought
}}
= 8.3970 *X
= 5.18616 * X
= 3.7290 * X
FP3 – White Spruce
Concluding remarks (Taylor et al.)
• Fungal diversity in soil is staggering
• We cannot yet fully capture fungal diversity
• Taxa that appear to be rare at a given sampling time and place are not necessarily regionally rare or unimportant
• Boreal forest fungal diversity has strong patchiness at multiple spatial scales, moderate seasonal dynamics, and yet unexpected inter-annual stability
• Soil horizon is an over-riding factor in fungal niche partitioning
• Relating all this diversity to function will be a gargantuan but exciting and worthwhile undertaking
Key questions (Johnstone)
• How well do these conceptual models fit our understanding of forest dynamics in Alaska?– Evidence for stable cycles?– Evidence for feedback mechanisms that
generate these cycles?– Evidence of fire generating threshold
responses?
Fire, nitrogen loss, and nitrogen availability in black spruce forests of
Interior Alaska
Michelle C. Mack1, Leslie A. Boby1, Edward A.G. Schuur1, Jill F. Johnstone2, Teresa N. Hollingsworth3 and F.S. Chapin, III3
1 University of Florida2 University of Saskatchewan
3 University of Alaska Fairbanks
Regional Syntheses of Resilience/Vulnerability
Climate Feedbacks of Alaska’s Boreal Forests (Euskirchen et al.)
Resilience of Human Communities in interior Alaska (Kofinas et al.)
Overall Synthesis of Resilience/Vulnerability
Vulnerability and Resilience of Alaska’s Boreal Forest to Climate Change: A Synthesis of Bonanza Creek LTER Research (Chapin et al.)
1. What are the feedbacks to climate in Alaska’s boreal forest?
2. What can we say about the magnitude of these climate feedbacks, both historically and in the future?
3. What are the primary unknowns in obtaining a better understanding of these feedbacks, and what role can earth system models play in helping us better understand these feedback?
The changing effects of Alaska boreal forests on the climate system
E. Euskirchen, A.D. McGuire, F.S. Chapin III, T.S. Rupp
Key Questions:
Important Dates for Special Issue
November – Titles
January – Outlines (haven’t received one outline) February 20th – Powerpoint presentations of progress
(haven’t received two)
April 17 – Rough Drafts to Terry, Roger, and myself
May 1 – Feedback from Terry, Roger, and myself
June 1 – Submission of manuscript to me
June 8 – Send all manuscripts to CJFR on CD
Breakout Groups
• Biophysical changes in the boreal forest: permafrost and climate feedbacks (Jorgenson, Euskirchen)
• Climate sensitivity of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (Jones, McGuire)
• Changing community dynamics of mosses, vascular plants (Turetsky, Hollingsworth)
• Microbial and pest response to climate change (Taylor, Juday)
• Changing fire regime and its impact on nitrogen and resilience (Kasischke, Johnstone, Mack)
• Changing animal dynamics and ecosystem services (Kielland, Kofinas)
Charge to Breakout Groups
• Within Paper Coordination
• Across Paper Coordination
• Papers need to be frame in Resilience/Vulnerability framework – Introduction, Discussion, Conclusion.
• 8000 words maximum
• Different perspectives of co-authors are fine. Key thing is for paper to clarify these different perspectives and outline how we move forward to reconcile the perspectives.
top related