Managing stand density to enhnce the adaptability of Scots pine to climate change: a modelling approach

Managing stand density to enhance the adaptability of Scots pine stands to

climate change: a modelling approach

A.Ameztegui, A. Cabon, M. de Cáceres, L. Coll

Introduction | The context



Introduction | The recipe



➤ ↑ timber quality



➤ ↓ Interception losses (↑ infiltration)




➤ ↓ Stand transpiration





➤ Available water apportioned among fewer trees






Positive effect on:






Positive effect on:

➤ ↑ tree vigour






Positive effect on:

➤ ↑ tree vigour

➤ ↑ WUE






Positive effect on:

➤ ↑ tree vigour

➤ ↑ WUE

➤ ↑resilience to drought events






Positive effect on:

➤ ↑ tree vigour

➤ ↑ WUE

➤ ↑resilience to drought events

➤ ↑ soil water content

Introduction | The problem



Transient effects


Transient effects Dependent on site,

thinning regime climatic scenario


Difficult long-term experiments Impossible to assess future

climate

Introduction | Our suggestion

SORTIE-ND medfate(swb)

mm

wat

er

2011 2012 2013

020

4060

80

RainfallPET

mm

wat

er

2011 2012 2013

01

23

Total evaporationPlant ETBare soil E

Wat

er c

onte

nt (%

vol

)

2011 2012 2013

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

PredictedMeasurements (6 CS616 probes, 0−30 cm, mean+/−1.96se)

Our objectives

➤ Can we predict the post-thinning dynamics?

Our objectives


➤ Effect of several factors

➤ Initial site conditions

➤ Climate scenario

➤ Thinning regime

Our objectives





➤ Thinning regime

➤ On several variables

➤ Forest production

➤ Water balance (blue water)

➤ Tree drought stress

Our objectives





➤ Thinning regime

➤ On several variables

➤ Forest production

➤ Water balance (blue water)

➤ Tree drought stress

Our objectives

Trade-offs

Methods | Case study

Pinus sylvestris(Scots pine)

➤ 240,000 ha (17%) ➤ 2/3 monospecific ➤ 160,000 m3 timber (25%)





Foto: M. Beltrán

Foto: T. Valor

Foto: S.Martín

Humid SiteTemp 8.7

Precip 828Martonne 44.3

Mesic SiteTemp 12.0

Precip 714.Martonne 32.5

Xeric SiteTemp 12.5Precip 564.Martonne 25.1

Methods | Initial conditions


Humid SiteTemp 8.7

Precip 828Martonne 44.3

Mesic SiteTemp 12.0

Precip 714.Martonne 32.5

Xeric SiteTemp 12.5Precip 564.Martonne 25.1

Methods | Initial conditions


Methods | Thinning regime

Methods | Thinning regime

Control -10% AB -20% AB -30% AB

-40% AB -50% AB -60% AB -70% AB

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

89

1011

1213

14

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.

HumidScenario A2

y = 9.0 + 0.0277 * year ^ 1.125

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

89

1011

1213

14

YearM

ean

Annu

al T

emp.

HumidScenario B2

y = 9.0 + 0.0916 * year ^ 0.728

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

1112

1314

1516

17

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.

MesicScenario A2

y = 12.0 + 0.0327 * year ^ 1.086

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

1112

1314

1516

17

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.MesicScenario B2

y = 12.0 + 0.1015 * year ^ 0.709

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

1112

1314

1516

17

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.

XericScenario A2

y = 12.5 + 0.0550 * year ^ 0.964

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

1112

1314

1516

17

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.

XericScenario B2

y = 12.5 + 0.1624 * year ^ 0.611

Methods | Climatic scenarios (temperature)

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

89

1011

1213

14

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.

HumidScenario A2

y = 9.0 + 0.0277 * year ^ 1.125

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

89

1011

1213

14

YearM

ean

Annu

al T

emp.

HumidScenario B2

y = 9.0 + 0.0916 * year ^ 0.728

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

1112

1314

1516

17

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.

MesicScenario A2

y = 12.0 + 0.0327 * year ^ 1.086

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

1112

1314

1516

17

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.MesicScenario B2

y = 12.0 + 0.1015 * year ^ 0.709

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

1112

1314

1516

17

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.

XericScenario A2

y = 12.5 + 0.0550 * year ^ 0.964

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

1112

1314

1516

17

Mea

n An

nual

Tem

p.

XericScenario B2

y = 12.5 + 0.1624 * year ^ 0.611

+ 4.6 ºC (47.8%)

+ 2.7 ºC (26.7%)

+ 4.3 ºC (35.8%)

+ 2.4 ºC (20.0%)

+ 4.2 ºC (33.6%)

+ 2.5 ºC (20.0%)

Methods | Climatic scenarios (temperature)

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

600

700

800

900

1000

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

HumidScenario A2

y = 806.2 − 0.0009 * year ^ 2.63

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

600

700

800

900

1000

YearM

ean

Annu

al P

rec.

HumidScenario B2

y = 806.2 − 0.4773 * year ^ 0.92

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

500

600

700

800

900

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

MesicScenario A2

y = 714.2 − 0.0227 * year ^ 1.91

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

500

600

700

800

900

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

MesicScenario B2

y = 714.2 − 4.286 * year ^ 0.60

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

400

500

600

700

800

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

XericScenario A2

y = 564.3 − 5.1·e−6 * year ^ 3.62

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

400

500

600

700

800

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

XericScenario B2

y = 564.3 − 2.53·e−8 * year ^ 1.0

Methods | Climatic scenarios (precipitation)

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

600

700

800

900

1000

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

HumidScenario A2

y = 806.2 − 0.0009 * year ^ 2.63

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

600

700

800

900

1000

YearM

ean

Annu

al P

rec.

HumidScenario B2

y = 806.2 − 0.4773 * year ^ 0.92

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

500

600

700

800

900

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

MesicScenario A2

y = 714.2 − 0.0227 * year ^ 1.91

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

500

600

700

800

900

Year

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

MesicScenario B2

y = 714.2 − 4.286 * year ^ 0.60

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

400

500

600

700

800

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

XericScenario A2

y = 564.3 − 5.1·e−6 * year ^ 3.62

2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

400

500

600

700

800

Mea

n An

nual

Pre

c.

XericScenario B2

y = 564.3 − 2.53·e−8 * year ^ 1.0

- 142 mm (14.8%)

- 52 mm (3.7%)

- 121 mm (17.0%)

- 63 mm (8.7%)

-64 mm (10.3%)

- 1.0 mm (0.1%)

Methods | Climatic scenarios (precipitation)

Modelling forest dynamics | SORTIE-ND


JABOWA (Botkin et al. 1972)

SORTIE Canham et al. (1996)

FORET (Shugar and West, 1977)

SORTIE-ND: spatially-explicit, individually-based model

Lines, 2012


Allometry & resources Growth

Mortality Dispersal & recruitment

Climate change


Allometry & resources Growth

Mortality Dispersal & recruitment

Climate change


Gomez-Aparicio et al. 2011; Glob. Cha. Biol.

Modelling water balance | medfate wbm

VEGETATION

Forest structure from SORTIE-ND

SOIL

Two layers 50 cm depth

Loamy texture 10-15% rock

LAI

Soil water holding capacity

PET

CLIMATE Rainfall

Interception Surface run-off

Soil water content Soil water potential

Transpiration

Evaporation

Whole plantconductance

Modelling water balance | medfate wbm

Rainfall

Intercep.on

Evapora.on

Deepdrainage

Baresoilevapora.on

Planttranspira.on

Percola.on

Soilinfiltra.onRunoff

Methods | Modelling approach



38

372 ini cond.

(10 rep)

NoCC CCB2 CCA2

20

40

60

20

40

60

20

40

60

PlotAPlotB

PlotC

0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100Year

Basa

l Are

a (m

2·ha−1

)

Intensity0010203040506070

TypeLow

Results | Can we predict forest dynamics?

NoCC CCB2 CCA2

20

30

40

50

20

30

40

50

20

30

40

50

PlotAPlotB

PlotC

0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100Year

Mea

n qu

adra

tic d

iam

eter

(cm

)

Intensity0010203040506070

TypeLow



Results | Effects on forest production

Results | Effects on forest growth (duration)

Humid Mesic Xeric

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

30

40

50

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60

Blu

e w

ate

r (%

)

Climate

� NoCC

CCB2

CCA2

Humid Mesic Xeric

� � � � � � � �

��

��

��

� �

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60

Thinning intensity (%)

Str

ess in

dex

A

B

Humid Mesic Xeric

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

30

40

50

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60

Blu

e w

ate

r (%

)

Climate

� NoCC

CCB2

CCA2

Humid Mesic Xeric

� � � � � � � �

��

��

��

� �

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60


Str

ess ind

ex

A

B

Results | Effects on water balance (blue water)

Humid Mesic Xeric

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

30

40

50

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60

Blu

e w

ate

r (%

)

Climate

� NoCC

CCB2

CCA2

Humid Mesic Xeric

� � � � � � � �

��

��

��

� �

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60


Str

ess index

A

B

Results | Effects on drought stress

Humid Mesic Xeric

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

30

40

50

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60

Blu

e w

ate

r (%

)

Climate

� NoCC

CCB2

CCA2

Humid Mesic Xeric

� � � � � � � �

��

��

��

� �

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60


Str

ess in

dex

A

B

Humid Mesic Xeric

�

� �

30

40

50

70 80 90 100 110 70 80 90 100 110 70 80 90 100 110

Blu

e w

ate

r (%

)

Thinning

intensity

� 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Climate

� NoCC

CCB2

CCA2

Humid Mesic Xeric

�

�

�

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

70 80 90 100 110 70 80 90 100 110 70 80 90 100 110

Final basal area (%)

Str

ess in

dex

A

B

Results | Trade-offs

Conclusions

➤ Trade-off between production and improvement in water status

Conclusions


➤ Trade-off site and climate-dependent

Conclusions



➤ Simultaneous gain only possible at humid sites or mesic sites (NoCC)

Conclusions




➤ Thinning interesting to increase resistance to drought in xeric sites

Conclusions





➤ In mesic sites, compromise between production and water management

Conclusions






➤ Under severe CC, very heavy thinning needed

Conclusions







➤ In some cases, not enough (species substitution?)

Conclusions







➤ In some cases, not enough (species substitution?)

➤ No general recipes

Conclusions

GRÀ[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Results | Duration of the effects on blue water

Humid Mesic Xeric

�

�

�

� � �

� �

�

�

� ��

�

��

�

��

� ��

�

�

0

20

40

60

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60

T5

0,B

W (

ye

ars

)

Climate

� NoCC

CCB2

CCA2

Humid Mesic Xeric

�

�

��

�

� �

�

��

�

� �

�

��

�

�

0

25

50

75

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60


T5

0,s

tre

ss (

ye

ars

)

A

B

Humid Mesic Xeric

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

30

40

50

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60B

lue

wa

ter

(%)

Climate

� NoCC

CCB2

CCA2

Humid Mesic Xeric

� � � � � � � �

��

��

��

� �

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60


Str

ess in

dex

A

B

Results | Duration of the effects on drought stress

Humid Mesic Xeric

�

�

�

� � �

� �

�

�

� ��

�

��

�

��

� ��

�

�

0

20

40

60

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60

T5

0,B

W (

years

)

Climate

� NoCC

CCB2

CCA2

Humid Mesic Xeric

�

�

��

�

� �

�

��

�

� �

�

��

�

�

0

25

50

75

0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60


T5

0,s

tre

ss (

years

)

A

B

Environment

Managing stand density to enhnce the adaptability of Scots pine to climate change: a modelling approach