On the Ecology of Mountainous Forests in a Changing Climate: A ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

200 Appendix I. Scientific and common names of European tree species The scientific names of the European tree species (Tab. A-1) follow Hess et al. (1980). The common names are from Phillips (1978). Tab. A-1: Scientific and common names of the 30 European tree species used in the FORCLIM model. Scientific name Common name Abies alba Miller European Silver Fir, Common Silver Fir Larix decidua Miller European Larch, Common Larch Picea excelsa (Lam.) Link Norway Spruce Pinus cembra L. Swiss Stone Pine, Arolla Pine Pinus montana Miller – Pinus silvestris L. Scots Pine Taxus baccata L. English Yew, Common Yew Acer campestre L. Field Maple, Hedge Maple Acer platanoides L. Norway Maple Acer pseudoplatanus L. Sycamore, Sycamore Maple Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn. Black Alder, Common Alder Alnus incana (L.) Moench Grey Alder, European Alder Alnus viridis (Chaix) DC. – Betula pendula Roth Silver Birch, European White Birch Carpinus betulus L. European Hornbeam, Common Hornbeam Castanea sativa Mill. Sweet Chestnut, Spanish Chestnut Corylus avellana L. Hazel, Cobnut Fagus silvatica L. European Beech, Common Beech Fraxinus excelsior L. European Ash, Common Ash Populus nigra L. Black Poplar Populus tremula L. European Aspen, Aspen Quercus petraea (Mattuschka) Lieblein Sessile Oak, Durmast Oak Quercus pubescens Willd. Downy Oak Quercus robur L. Pedunculate Oak, English Oak Salix alba L. White Willow Sorbus aria (L.) Crantz Whitebeam Sorbus aucuparia L. Rowan, (European) Mountain Ash Tilia cordata Miller Small-leaved Lime Tilia platyphyllos Scop. Large-leaved Lime Ulmus scabra Miller Scotch Elm, Wych Elm
Appendix 201 II. Derivation of parameters for European tree species sType parameter The sType parameter serves two purposes: First, it separates evergreen (coniferous) from deciduous species; the two types differ in the specific leaf area (the foliage area per unit foliage weight, parameter kC 2 ), and the dry to wet weight ratio of foliage (parameter kC 1 ). Values for these parameters were derived based on a large data set covering 8 species (Abies alba, Picea excelsa, Pinus silvestris, Pinus cembra, Pinus montana, Larix decidua, Fagus silvatica, Quercus spp.) in Burger (1945-1953). The data by Mitscherlich (1970, p. 28) was also evaluated, but it was concluded that the Burger data provided a more reliable basis for estimating these parameters. Second, it describes the relationship between diameter at breast height (D) and foliage weight of the species. These relationships were derived based on Burger (1945-1953) as well. Because of the scarcity of data on other species, five relationships were defined from the Burger data, and the remaining species were assigned to one of these classes based on their capability to cast shade as described by Ellenberg (1986, p. 82) and on the values of the parameters A1 and A2 used in the FORECE model (Kienast 1987). Specific leaf area and dry to wet weight ratio Regression analyses of foliage area vs. foliage weight showed large correlation coefficients, whereas the intercepts were not significantly different from zero (α = 5%) for all species except for Quercus spp., where the intercept differs from zero at α = 0.002 (Tab. A-2). The slope for evergreen (coniferous) species varies between 5.1 and 6.6 [m 2·kg -1 ]; thus a value of kC 2 = 6 m 2·kg -1 was used. For deciduous species, the range of the slope is 10.1 to 14.9 [m 2·kg -1 ]; a value of kC 2 = 12 m 2·kg -1 was used. Tab. A-2: Regression analysis of foliage area (gFolA) vs. foliage wet weight (L) according to the equation gFolA = i + kC 2·L, dry to wet weight ratio of foliage (kC 1 ), and sample size (n) from Burger (1945- 1953). Species i kC 2 r 2 kC 1 n Pinus silvestris 0.24 5.50 0.983 0.386 210 P. montana 2.29 5.95 0.989 0.489 18 P. cembra -2.59 6.64 0.994 0.408 4 Picea excelsa -0.51 5.27 0.979 0.478 56 Abies alba -1.47 5.09 0.987 0.465 52 Fagus silvatica 9.78 14.89 0.948 0.363 91 Larix decidua 6.67 10.05 0.984 0.366 99 Quercus spp. 17.41 10.07 0.983 0.362 51 The dry to wet weight ratio for deciduous trees shows small variability between the species (Tab. A-2); a value of 0.35 was used. For evergreen species, variability is larger and the average dry to wet weight ratio is 0.445; thus a value of 0.45 was used. Derivation of a relationship between foliage weight and DBH The analysis of the species-specific data in Burger (1945-53) indicated that several species have similar relationships between foliage wet weight (L) and diameter at breast height (D). Thus, these species were grouped. Tab. A-3 gives the regression formulae obtained for four species/species groups, plus an additional species group having low foliage weight (e.g. Betula, Salix), for which kA 1 was set arbitrarily 20% lower, i.e. to
Page 1:
Diss. ETH No. 10638 On the Ecology
Page 4 and 5:
ii Table of contents A BSTRACT.....
Page 6 and 7:
iv APPENDIX .......................
Page 8 and 9:
vi Harald BUGMANN, 1994: On the eco
Page 10 and 11:
viii Harald BUGMANN, 1994: Aspekte
Page 13 and 14:
1 1 . Introduction 1.1 Climatic cha
Page 15 and 16:
Introduction 3 1.2 Methods for the
Page 17 and 18:
Introduction 5 in a changing climat
Page 19 and 20:
Introduction 7 Their integrative ca
Page 21 and 22:
Introduction 9 (1984) provides a mo
Page 23 and 24:
Introduction 11 The main advantage
Page 25 and 26:
13 2 . Analysis of existing forest
Page 27 and 28:
Analysis of existing forest gap mod
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
The forest model FORCLIM 45 carbon
Page 41 and 42:
The forest model FORCLIM 47 TREE GR
Page 43 and 44:
The forest model FORCLIM 49 gBFlag
Page 45 and 46:
The forest model FORCLIM 51 Disturb
Page 47 and 48:
The forest model FORCLIM 53 decay o
Page 49 and 50:
The forest model FORCLIM 55 the est
Page 51 and 52:
The forest model FORCLIM 57 3.3 Mod
Page 53 and 54:
The forest model FORCLIM 59 Light a
Page 55 and 56:
The forest model FORCLIM 61 Overall
Page 57 and 58:
The forest model FORCLIM 63 D (cm)
Page 59 and 60:
The forest model FORCLIM 65 a) b) c
Page 61 and 62:
The forest model FORCLIM 67 Growth
Page 63 and 64:
The forest model FORCLIM 69 Stress-
Page 65 and 66:
The forest model FORCLIM 71 Tab. 3.
Page 67 and 68:
The forest model FORCLIM 73 3.3.2 F
Page 69 and 70:
The forest model FORCLIM 75 where k
Page 71 and 72:
The forest model FORCLIM 77 NITROGE
Page 73 and 74:
The forest model FORCLIM 79 peratur
Page 75 and 76:
The forest model FORCLIM 81 of degr
Page 77 and 78:
The forest model FORCLIM 83 microcl
Page 79 and 80:
The forest model FORCLIM 85 Tab. 3.
Page 81 and 82:
The forest model FORCLIM 87 3.4.3 F
Page 83 and 84:
The forest model FORCLIM 89 All the
Page 85 and 86:
The forest model FORCLIM 91 The mas
Page 87 and 88:
The forest model FORCLIM 93 FORCLIM
Page 89 and 90:
Behaviour of FORCLIM along a transe
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Parameter sensitivity & model valid
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144: Parameter sensitivity & model valid
Page 145 and 146: Parameter sensitivity & model valid
Page 147 and 148: 153 6 . Model applications Climatic
Page 149 and 150: Model applications 155 The simulate
Page 151 and 152: Model applications 157 6.2 Possible
Page 153 and 154: Model applications 159 simulation s
Page 155 and 156: Model applications 161 Simulation e
Page 157 and 158: Model applications 163 At the site
Page 159 and 160: Model applications 165 Bever Biomas
Page 161 and 162: Model applications 167 tainty inher
Page 163 and 164: Model applications 169 scenario cho
Page 165 and 166: Discussion 171 Finally, the analysi
Page 167 and 168: Discussion 173 bitrarily chosen par
Page 169 and 170: Discussion 175 comparably small imp
Page 171 and 172: Discussion 177 end of the 21st cent
Page 173 and 174: Conclusions 179 Ecological factors
Page 175 and 176: Conclusions 181 species composition
Page 177 and 178: References 183 Begon, M., Harper, J
Page 179 and 180: References 185 Burger, H., 1951. Ho
Page 181 and 182: References 187 Faber, P.J., 1991. A
Page 183 and 184: References 189 Huntley, B. & Birks,
Page 185 and 186: References 191 Leemans, R. & Prenti
Page 187 and 188: References 193 Olson, J.S., 1963. E
Page 189 and 190: References 195 Rudloff, W., 1981. W
Page 191 and 192: References 197 Smith, T.M., Leemans
Page 193: References 199 Whittaker, R.H., 195
Page 197 and 198: Appendix 203 Tab. A-4: Tree species
Page 199 and 200: Appendix 205 Tab. A-7: Values for m
Page 201 and 202: Appendix 207 The minimum winter tem
Page 203 and 204: Appendix 209 Tab. A-11: Shade toler
Page 205 and 206: Appendix 211 Tab. A-14: Climatic pa
Page 207 and 208: Appendix 213 IV. Source code of the
Page 209 and 210: Appendix 215 FROM SimBase IMPORT De
Page 211 and 212: Appendix 217 END; (* IF *) prevDay
Page 213 and 214: Appendix 219 PROCEDURE InitializeFW
Page 215 and 216: Appendix 221 InstallSeparator( fMen
Page 217 and 218: Appendix 223 FROM FCPFileIO IMPORT
Page 219 and 220: Appendix 225 modelSp^.p.kHm := sens
Page 221 and 222: Appendix 227 DeclMV( meanLitt[leafS
Page 223 and 224: Appendix 229 Swiss Federal Institut
Page 225 and 226: Appendix 231 (*********************
Page 227 and 228: Appendix 233 BEGIN WITH sp^ DO d :=
Page 229 and 230: Appendix 235 Definition module FCPB
Page 231 and 232: Appendix 237 Purpose Simulation mod
Page 233 and 234: Appendix 239 END Immobilization; PR
Page 235 and 236: Appendix 241 CONST lem = 3; VAR ef:
Page 237 and 238: Appendix 243 Purpose Provides the b
Page 239 and 240: Appendix 245 Example of a text file
Page 241 and 242: Appendix 247 Tab. A-15: Lower end o
Page 243 and 244: Appendix 249 Tab. A-17: Percentage
Page 245 and 246:
Appendix 251 Tab. A-19: Significant
Page 247 and 248:
Appendix 253 VI. Derivation of para
Page 249 and 250:
Appendix 255 Tab. A-21: Species-spe
Page 251 and 252:
Appendix 257 Tab. A-22 (continued)
show all

On the Ecology of Mountainous Forests in a Changing Climate: A ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?