Hopp til hovedinnholdet

Publications

NIBIOs employees contribute to several hundred scientific articles and research reports every year. You can browse or search in our collection which contains references and links to these publications as well as other research and dissemination activities. The collection is continously updated with new and historical material.

2018

Abstract

No abstract has been registered

To document

Abstract

Recently, severe droughts that occurred in North America are likely to have impacted its terrestrial carbon sink. However, process‐based understanding of how meteorological conditions prior to the onset of drought, for instance warm or cold springs, affect drought‐induced carbon cycle effects remains scarce. Here we assess and compare the response of terrestrial carbon fluxes to summer droughts in 2011 and 2012 characterized by contrasting spring conditions. The analysis is based on a comprehensive ensemble of carbon cycle models, including FLUXCOM, TRENDY v5, SiBCASA, CarbonTracker Europe, and CarbonTracker, and emerging Earth observations. In 2011, large reductions of net ecosystem production (NEP; −0.24 ± 0.17 Pg C/year) are due to decreased gross primary production (−0.17 ± 0.18 Pg C/year) and slightly increased ecosystem respiration (+0.07 ± 0.17 Pg C/year). Conversely, in 2012, NEP reductions (−0.17 ± 0.25 Pg C/year) are attributed to a larger increase of ecosystem respiration (+0.48 ± 0.27 Pg C/year) than gross primary production (+0.31 ± 0.29 Pg C/year), induced predominantly by an extra warmer spring prior to summer drought. Two temperate ecoregions crops/agriculture and the grass/shrubs contribute largest to these reductions and also dominate the interannual variations of NEP during 2007–2014. Moreover, the warming spring compensated largely the negative carbon anomaly due to summer drought, consistent with earlier studies; however, the compensation occurred only in some specific ecoregions. Overall, our analysis offers a refined view on recent carbon cycle variability and extremes in North America. It corroborates earlier results but also highlights differences with respect to ecoregion‐specific carbon cycle responses to drought and heat.

To document

Abstract

Field measurements of aboveground net primary productivity (ANPP) in temperate grasslands suggest that both positive and negative asymmetric responses to changes in precipitation (P) may occur. Under normal range of precipitation variability, wet years typically result in ANPP gains being larger than ANPP declines in dry years (positive asymmetry), whereas increases in ANPP are lower in magnitude in extreme wet years compared to reductions during extreme drought (negative asymmetry). Whether the current generation of ecosystem models with a coupled carbon– water system in grasslands are capable of simulating these asymmetric ANPP responses is an unresolved question. In this study, we evaluated the simulated responses of temperate grassland primary productivity to scenarios of altered precipitation with 14 ecosystem models at three sites: Shortgrass steppe (SGS), Konza Prairie (KNZ) and Stubai Valley meadow (STU), spanning a rainfall gradient from dry to moist. We found that (1) the spatial slopes derived from modeled primary productivity and precipitation across sites were steeper than the temporal slopes obtained from interannual variations, which was consistent with empirical data; (2) the asymmetry of the responses of modeled primary productivity under normal inter-annual precipitation variability differed among models, and the mean of the model ensemble suggested a negative asymmetry across the three sites, which was contrary to empirical evidence based on filed observations; (3) the mean sensitivity of modeled productivity to rainfall suggested greater negative response with reduced precipitation than positive response to an increased precipitation under extreme conditions at the three sites; and (4) gross primary productivity (GPP), net primary productivity (NPP), aboveground NPP (ANPP) and belowground NPP (BNPP) all showed concave-down nonlinear responses to altered precipitation in all the models, but with different curvatures and mean values. Our results indicated that most models overestimate the negative drought effects and/or underestimate the positive effects of increased precipitation on primary productivity under normal climate conditions, highlighting the need for improving eco-hydrological processes in those models in the future.

To document

Abstract

One of the main questions in ecosystem restoration is where to obtain the seeds to re-establish plant communities. While the most commonly advocated approach is to use seeds from local sources, some experts argue against this because local populations may harbour little genetic variability for the restored populations to be able to adapt to and survive global change. Instead, they propose alternative strategies such as mixing seeds from various sources to increase genetic variability and adaptive potential, or using seeds from populations that have a similar climate as predicted for the target locality in the future. All these alternative seed-sourcing strategies have in common that they involve a transplanting of plant ecotypes, sometimes over large spatial scales. This is risky because plants from distant origins may be maladapted to the current local abiotic and biotic environment. In addition, introduction of non-local provenances will disrupt natural patterns of withinspecies biodiversity and will affect ecological networks, with unpredictable consequences. To balance the value of local adaptation with the need for future adaptation potential, we propose ‘regional admixture provenancing’ as a compromise strategy. Here seeds are sourced from multiple populations within the same region as the target locality and mixed prior to use. The mixing of seeds will increase the genetic diversity necessary for future adaptation, while restricting seed origins to a regional scale will maintain regional adaptation and reduce the risk of unintended effects on other biota. This approach is feasible in practice and has recently been implemented in Germany. We believe that it represents a compromise to reconcile opposing views on ecological restoration.

To document

Abstract

Diversity of arable plants in Europe has markedly declined during the past decades and many species have become threatened. Low‐intensity farming can offer potential retreats for these species, while spontaneous dispersal between such fields is unlikely. Thus, reintroduction of endangered species is necessary to restore agrobiodiversity. To test the applicability under real farm conditions, we seeded a mixture of three winter annuals (Legousia speculum‐veneris, Consolida regalis, Lithospermum arvense) at 850 seeds/m2 on four organic farms near Munich, Germany, in autumn 2011. Seed production and soil seed banks were investigated on four plots within one field on each farm for 3 years. In addition, we evaluated seed dispersal caused by arable management along the main machining direction. In the first year, winter cereals were cultivated and the study species emerged at all sites with a seed production mostly exceeding the initial sowing rates. In the third year, species establishment varied depending on crop rotations. Seed production of L. speculum‐veneris was higher than in the two other species, and exceeded the number of originally sown seeds up to 20 times. While L. speculum‐veneris became very common in the seed bank, C. regalis was less abundant and L. arvense hardly developed a soil seed bank. Seeds of L. speculum‐veneris and L. arvense were found up to 15 m and seeds of C. regalis up to 13 m away from the sown plots. We suggest using seed production, seed bank, and dispersal as key indicators to evaluate establishment of reintroduced arable plants.