Search for: All records

Mortality of tree species around the globe is increasingly driven by hotter drought and heat waves. Tree juveniles are at risk, as well as adults, and this will have a negative effect on forest dynamics and structure under climate change. Novel management options are urgently needed to reduce this mortality and positively affect forest dynamics and structure. Potential drought-ameliorating soil amendments such as nanochitosan – a biopolymer upcycled from byproducts of the seafood industry – may provide an additional set of useful tools for reducing juvenile mortality during hotter droughts. Nanochitosan promotes water and nutrient absorption in plants but has not been tested in the context of drought and heat stress. We evaluated factors affecting mortality risk and rate for drylandPinus edulisjuveniles (2–3 years old) in a growth chamber using a factorial experiment that included ambient and +4°C warmer base temperatures, with and without a 10 day +8°C heat wave, and with and without a nanochitosan soil amendment. The nanochitosan treatment reduced the relative risk of mortality, emphasizing a protective function of this soil amendment, reducing the relative risk of mortality by 37%. Importantly, the protective effects of nanochitosan soil amendment in delaying tree mortality under hotter drought and heat waves provides a new, potentially positive management treatment for tree juveniles trying to survive in the climate of the Anthropocene.

Restoring and preserving the world's forests are promising natural pathways to mitigate some aspects of climate change. In addition to regulating atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, forests modify surface and near‐surface air temperatures through biophysical processes. In the eastern United States (EUS), widespread reforestation during the 20th century coincided with an anomalous lack of warming, raising questions about reforestation's contribution to local cooling and climate mitigation. Using new cross‐scale approaches and multiple independent sources of data, we uncovered links between reforestation and the response of both surface and air temperature in the EUS. Ground‐ and satellite‐based observations showed that EUS forests cool the land surface by 1–2°C annually compared to nearby grasslands and croplands, with the strongest cooling effect during midday in the growing season, when cooling is 2–5°C. Young forests (20–40 years) have the strongest cooling effect on surface temperature. Surface cooling extends to the near‐surface air, with forests reducing midday air temperature by up to 1°C compared to nearby non‐forests. Analyses of historical land cover and air temperature trends showed that the cooling benefits of reforestation extend across the landscape. Locations surrounded by reforestation were up to 1°C cooler than neighboring locations that did not undergo land cover change, and areas dominated by regrowing forests were associated with cooling temperature trends in much of the EUS. Our work indicates reforestation contributed to the historically slow pace of warming in the EUS, underscoring reforestation's potential as a local climate adaptation strategy in temperate regions.

Widespread shifts in land cover and land management (LCLM) are being incentivized as tools to mitigate climate change, creating an urgent need for prognostic assessments of how LCLM impacts surface energy balance and temperature. Historically, observational studies have tended to focus on how LCLM impacts surface temperature (T_surf), usually at annual timescales. However, understanding the potential for LCLM change to confer climate adaptation benefits, or to produce unintended adverse consequences, requires careful consideration of impacts on bothT_surfand the near-surface air temperature (T_a,local) when they are most consequential for ecosystem and societal well-being (e.g. on hot summer days). Here, long-term data from 130 AmeriFlux towers distributed between 19–71 °N are used to systematically explore LCLM impacts on bothT_surfandT_a,local, with an explicit focus on midday summer periods when adaptive cooling is arguably most needed. We observe profound impacts of LCLM onT_surfat midday, frequently amounting to differences of 10 K or more from one site to the next. LCLM impacts onT_a,localare smaller but still significant, driving variation of 5–10 K across sites. The magnitude of LCLM impacts on bothT_surfandT_a,localis not well explained by plant functional type, climate regime, or albedo; however, we show that LCLM shifts that enhance ET or increase canopy height are likely to confer a local mid-day cooling benefit for bothT_surfandT_a,localmost of the time. At night, LCLM impacts on temperature are much smaller, such that averaging across the diurnal cycle will underestimate the potential for land cover to mediate microclimate when the consequences for plant and human well-being are most stark. Finally, during especially hot periods, land cover impacts onT_a,localandT_surfare less coordinated, and ecosystems that tend to cool the air during normal conditions may have a diminished capacity to do so when it is very hot. We end with a set of practical recommendations for future work evaluating the biophysical impacts and adaptation potential of LCLM shifts.

Some plants exhibit dynamic hydraulic regulation, in which the strictness of hydraulic regulation (i.e. iso/anisohydry) changes in response to environmental conditions. However, the environmental controls over iso/anisohydry and the implications of flexible hydraulic regulation for plant productivity remain unknown.

Recent advances in remote sensing of solar‐induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF) have garnered wide interest from the biogeoscience and Earth system science communities, due to the observed linearity between SIF and gross primary productivity (GPP) at increasing spatiotemporal scales. Three recent studies, Maguire et al., (2020,https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087858), He et al. (2020,https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087474), and Marrs et al. (2020,https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087956) highlight a nonlinear relationship between fluorescence and photochemical yields and show empirical evidence for the decoupling of SIF, stomata, and the carbon reactions of photosynthesis. Such mechanistic studies help advance our understanding of what SIF is and what it is not. We argue that these findings are not necessarily contradictory to the linear SIF‐GPP relationship observed at the satellite scale and provide context for where, when, and why fluorescence and photosynthesis diverge at smaller spatiotemporal scales. Understanding scale dependencies of remote sensing data is crucial for interpreting SIF as a proxy for GPP.