2021
Forfattere
Martin Forsius Maximilian Posch Maria Holmberg Jussi Vuorenmaa Sirpa Kleemola Algirdas Augustaitis Burkhard Beudert Witold Bochenek Nicholas Clarke Heleen de Wit Thomas Dirnböck Jane Frey Ulf Grandin Hannele Hakola Johannes Kobler Pavel Krám Antti-Jussi Lindroos Liisa Ukonmaanaho Salar Valinia Milan VáňaSammendrag
Anthropogenic emissions of nitrogen (N) and sulphur (S) compounds and their long-range transport have caused widespread negative impacts on different ecosystems. Critical loads (CLs) are deposition thresholds used to describe the sensitivity of ecosystems to atmospheric deposition. The CL methodology has been a key science-based tool for assessing the environmental consequences of air pollution. We computed CLs for eutrophication and acidification using a European long-term dataset of intensively studied forested ecosystem sites (n = 17) in northern and central Europe. The sites belong to the ICP IM and eLTER networks. The link between the site-specific calculations and time-series of CL exceedances and measured site data was evaluated using long-term measurements (1990–2017) for bulk deposition, throughfall and runoff water chemistry. Novel techniques for presenting exceedances of CLs and their temporal development were also developed. Concentrations and fluxes of sulphate, total inorganic nitrogen (TIN) and acidity in deposition substantially decreased at the sites. Decreases in S deposition resulted in statistically significant decreased concentrations and fluxes of sulphate in runoff and decreasing trends of TIN in runoff were more common than increasing trends. The temporal developments of the exceedance of the CLs indicated the more effective reductions of S deposition compared to N at the sites. There was a relation between calculated exceedance of the CLs and measured runoff water concentrations and fluxes, and most sites with higher CL exceedances showed larger decreases in both TIN and H+ concentrations and fluxes. Sites with higher cumulative exceedance of eutrophication CLs (averaged over 3 and 30 years) generally showed higher TIN concentrations in runoff. The results provided evidence on the link between CL exceedances and empirical impacts, increasing confidence in the methodology used for the European-scale CL calculations. The results also confirm that emission abatement actions are having their intended effects on CL exceedances and ecosystem impacts.
Forfattere
Dina Stober Monika Suškevičs Sebastian Eiter Stefanie Müller Stanislav Martinat Matthias BucheckerSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
2020
Forfattere
Pia HeltoftSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Forfattere
Arne SteffenremSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Forfattere
Paul C. Rogers Bradley D. Pinno Jan Šebesta Benedicte R. Albrectsen Guoqing Li Natalya Ivanova Antonín Kusbach Timo Kuuluvainen Simon M. Landhäusser Hongyan Liu Tor Myking Pertti Pulkkinen Zhongming Wen Dominik KulakowskiSammendrag
Across the northern hemisphere, six species of aspen (Populus spp.) play a disproportionately important role in promoting biodiversity, sequestering carbon, limiting forest disturbances, and providing other ecosystem services. These species are illustrative of efforts to move beyond single-species conservation because they facilitate hundreds of plants and animals worldwide. This review is intended to place aspen in a global conservation context by focusing on the many scientific advances taking place in such biologically diverse systems. In this manner, aspen may serve as a model for other widespread keystone systems where science-based practice may have world implications for biodiversity conservation. In many regions, aspen can maintain canopy dominance for decades to centuries as the sole major broadleaf trees in forested landscapes otherwise dominated by conifers. Aspen ecosystems are valued for many reasons, but here we highlight their potential as key contributors to regional and global biodiversity. We present global trends in research priorities, strengths, and weaknesses based on, 1) a qualitative survey, 2) a systematic literature analysis, and 3) regional syntheses of leading research topics. These regional syntheses explore important aspen uses, threats, and research priorities with the ultimate intent of research sharing focused on sound conservation practice. In all regions, we found that aspen enhance biodiversity, facilitate rapid (re)colonization in natural and damaged settings (e.g., abandoned mines), and provide adaptability in changing environments. Common threats to aspen ecosystems in many, but not all, regions include effects of herbivory, land clearing, logging practices favoring conifer species, and projected climate warming. We also highlight regional research gaps that emerged from the three survey approaches above. We believe multi-scale research is needed that examines disturbance processes in the context of dynamic climates where ecological, physiological, and genetic variability will ultimately determine widespread aspen sustainability. Based on this global review of aspen research, we argue for the advancement of the “mega-conservation” strategy, centered on the idea of sustaining a set of common keystone communities (aspen) that support wide arrays of obligate species. This approach contrasts with conventional preservation which focuses limited resources on individual species residing in narrow niches.
Forfattere
Isabella Righini Bram Vanthoor Michel Verheul Naseer Muhammad Henk Maessen Tomas Persson Cecilia StanghelliniSammendrag
A greenhouse climate-crop yield model was adapted to include additional climate modification techniques suitable for enabling sustainable greenhouse management at high latitudes. Additions to the model were supplementary lighting, secondary heating and heat harvesting technologies. The model: 1) included the impact of different light sources on greenhouse air temperature and tomato production 2) included a secondary heating system 3) calculated the amount of harvested heat whilst lighting was used. The crop yield model was not modified but it was validated for growing tomato in a semi-closed greenhouse equipped with HPS lamps (top-lights) and LED (inter-lights) in Norway. The combined climate-yield model was validated with data from a commercial greenhouse in Norway. The results showed that the model was able to predict the air temperature with sufficient accuracy during the validation periods with Relative Root Mean Square Error <10%. Tomato yield was accurately simulated in the cases under investigation, yielding a final production difference between 0.7% and 4.3%. Lack of suitable data prevented validation of the heat harvest sub-model, but a scenario is presented calculating the maximum harvestable heat in an illuminated greenhouse. Given the cumulative energy used for heating, the total amount of heating pipe energy which could be fulfilled with the heat harvestable from the greenhouse air was around 50%. Given the overall results, the greenhouse climate(-crop yield) model modified and presented in this study is considered accurate enough to support decisions about investments at farm level and/or evaluate beforehand the possible consequences of environmental policies.
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
This study provides a multi-attribute approach to support decisions by Norwegian crop farmers considering adopting innovative crop protection measures. In modelling choice among pest management strategies, we have accounted for both economic risks, risks to human health and risks to the environment. We used the Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique (SMART) to evaluate the results of a field trial comparing four different pest management strategies. In the trial, various pre-crops in year one were followed by two consecutive years of winter wheat. Two treatments had different levels of integrated pest management (IPM). IPM1 was the most innovative treatment and used less pesticides (i.e. herbicides, insecticides and fungicides) than IPM2. The third treatment (‘Worst Case’, WC) used pesticides routinely. The fourth treatment (‘No Plant Protection’, NPP) used no plant protection measures except one reduced dose of herbicide per year on winter wheat. Two main attributes were included in the SMART analysis, an economic indicator and a pesticide load indicator, each of which comprised a number of attributes at a subsidiary level. The results showed that the IPM1 and NPP strategies performed better than IPM2 and the WC strategies. However, the ranking of the pest management practices depended on the weighting of the two main attributes. Although the SMART analysis gave ordinal utility values, permitting only ranking of the alternatives, we were able to transform the results to measure financial differences between the alternatives.