Forests Fighting Climate

The rise of populations and technological and social development has driven up global demands for bio fuels and grain as feed for animals for meat. This creates powerful incentives for agro-industries to expand into forest regions, notably the Amazon rainforest, causing dramatic and often irreversible change to the environment (Nepstad et al. 2008). Forest fires, drought and logging increase susceptibility to further burning while deforestation and smoke can inhibit rainfall, exacerbating fire risk in this positive feedback loop. If sea surface temperature anomalies and associated droughts to continue, approximately 55% of the forests of the Amazon will be cleared, logged, damaged by drought or burned over the next 20 years, as shown in Figure 1 (Nepstad et al. 2008). The trees of the Amazon contain 90–140 billion tons of carbon, equivalent to approximately 9–14 decades of current global human-induced carbon emissions each year (Canadell et al. 2007). A lot of this is released back to the atmosphere, partly by a reduction in carbon uptake by the trees, but also in burning and soil process changes. Lenton et al. (2008) predict a timescale of 50 years for the Amazon to switch to an alternative state with severely decreased biodiversity and rainfall. A large fraction of precipitation in the Amazon basin is recycled, and reductions in precipitation lead to  lengthening of the dry season, and increases in summer temperatures that make it forest re-establishment difficult, and suggest the system may exhibit bi-stability, with two stable states (Lenton et al. 2008).

Figure 1 - Amazon forest degradation map (Nepstad et al., 2008)

It is also proposed that human induced climate change is impacting boreal forests, as shown by a study in the western United States that links forest “greenness” to fluctuating year-to-year snow-pack. This study showed that mid-elevation - those between approximately 6,500 to 8,000 feet - mountain ecosystems are most sensitive to rising temperatures and changes in precipitation and snow-melt (Trujillo et al, 2012). The study by University of Colorado, funded by NASA, used satellite and ground data to identify the threshold where mid-elevation forests sustained primarily by moisture shift into higher-elevation forests sustained primarily by sunlight and temperature. They found that  mid-elevation forests are very sensitive to snow that fell the previous winter, with about half of the mid-elevation forest greenness attributed to the previous winter’s snow accumulation (Trujillo et al, 2012). Climate studies indicate that snow-pack in mid-elevation forests in the Western United States and in similar forests around the world has been decreasing in the past 50 years due to regional warming (Trujillo et al., 2012), producing a feedback system that will continue to increase warming due to decreased albedo and reduced carbon sequestration. Lenton et al. (2008) predict that the decline of boreal forest would cause a biome switch on a scale of about 50 years, transitioning to open woodlands or grasslands. Under climate change the complex interaction between tree physiology, permafrost, and fire would experience increased water stress, increased peak summer heat stress causing increased mortality, vulnerability to disease and subsequent fire, as well as decreased reproduction rates (Lenton et al., 2008)

Nepstad et al (2008) conclude that trends in Amazon economies, forests and climate may lead to the replacement or severe degradation of more than half of the Amazon basin forests by 2030. They suggest that recent success in changing landholder behaviour, as well as the designation of protected areas and practical techniques for concentrating livestock production on smaller areas of land that could reduce the likelihood of severe environmental change.

Canadell, J. G. et al. (2007) “Contributions to accelerating atmospheric CO2 growth from economic activity, carbon intensity, and efficiency of natural sinks”. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 18 866–18 870.

Lenton, T., M., H. Held, E. Kriegler, J. W. Hall, W. Lucht, S. Rahmstorf, and H. J. Schellnhuber, (2008) “Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system” PNAS, 105, 6, 1786–1793

Nepstad, D., C., C. M. Stickler, B. Soares-Filho, and F. Merry. (2008) Interactions among Amazon land use, forests and climate: prospects for a near-term forest tipping point. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 363, 1737–1746

Trujillo, E., N. P. Molotch, M. L. Goulden, A. E. Kelly and R.C. Bales (2012) “Elevation-dependent influence of snow accumulation on forest greening” Nature Geoscience, 5, 705–709

To the Point Prediction

Luckily, we are not left blindly waiting for tipping points to occur. Once we know that they exist, or have occurred in the past, we can look out for early warnings. Early warning can take several forms, as simple as the knowledge that an event could occur and that it is becoming more likely, to a forecast of its timing and modelling of future events (Lenton, 2011). Slowing down of a system before a bifurcation occurs has been noticed in present day systems, climate-model output and palaeoclimate data; it causes the intrinsic rates of change in a system to decrease, and thus the state of the system becomes more like its past, alternative state (Lenton, 2011). Similar to this are ‘small-signal amplification’ and ‘noise amplification’, where small intermittent perturbations or noise are amplified at particular frequencies depending on the type of bifurcation (Lenton, 2011). Ditlevsen and Johnsen (2010) describe the two generic characteristics of the approach to a bifurcation point as increased variance of the observed signal and the corresponding increased auto-correlation related to critical slow down. They do however, stress that the early warning of climate or structural change in any system can only be obtained if increase in both variance and auto-correlation is observed, and that conclusions drawn based solely on one of the signals and not the other are invalid (Ditlevsen and Johnsen, 2010).

http://cpa.ds.npr.org/wamc/audio/2013/11/11-25-13_harvard_forest_troubled_lakes.mp3

In this talk, (see link above) Dr. Aaron Ellison talks about ecosystems and tipping points, briefly discussing the findings of his 2013 collaborative paper – Sirota et al. 2013.

Image from North Carolina Native Plant Society,
 http://www.ncwildflower.org/index.php/plants/details/sarracenia-purpurea/

Although experimental induction of tipping points is rare due to the scale of the system in question, Sirota et al. (2013) experimentally induced a shift from aerobic to anaerobic states in a miniature aquatic ecosystem of the self-contained pools that form in leaves of the carnivorous northern pitcher plant, Sarracenia purpurea, in order to represent the shift from a clear, oligotrophic lake to a murky, eutrophic one. The plants were fed controlled amounts of dried, ground arthropod prey. In controls, the concentration of dissolved oxygen replicates exhibited regular diurnal cycles associated with daytime photosynthesis and nocturnal plant respiration. Results showed that increasing organic-matter loading led to predictable changes in O2 dynamics, with high loading consistently driving the system past a well-defined tipping point. The Sarracenia micro ecosystem therefore functions as a compliant experimental system in which to examine prediction and management of tipping points.

This, as well as other models, tests and qualitative observations, show promise for early warning of bifurcation-type climate tipping points, but there are potential limitations of ‘false alarms’ (false positives) and ‘missed alarms’ (false negatives) (Lenton, 2011) that must be considered before jumping to conclusions. There is, however, hope for a better understanding of impending tipping points and how we can mitigate, if not prevent, them.

Ditlevsen, P. D. & Johnsen, S. J. (2010). “Tipping points: Early warning and wishful thinking”. Geophysical  Research Letters, 37.

Lenton, T., M., (2011) “Early warning of climate tipping points” Nature Climate Change, 1, 201-209

Sirota, J., B. Baiser, N. J. Gotelli, and A. M. Ellison. 2013. Organic-matter loading determines regime shifts and alternative states in an aquatic ecosystem. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 110: 7742-7747.

Tipping the biosphere

My previous posts have described how critical transitions lead to state shifts, causing abrupt changes and unanticipated effects. Although humans appear to dominate Earth, we have a huge dependence on the biosphere and ecosystem functioning for resource capture, primary production, and decomposition and recycling of nutrients, as well as potentially ecosystem stability (Cardinale et al, 2012). If the relationships mentioned by Cardinale et al (2012) transpose to a planetary scale, the implication is that global biodiversity and species richness positively correlate with the resilience and functioning of the biosphere (Lenton et al. 2013). For this reason, there has been an almost compulsory growth in interest in forecasting biological responses on all temporal and spatial scales (Barnosky et al, 2012).

But how do these changes occur?

Barnosky et al. (2012) describe biological states as neither steady nor in equilibrium, and say critical thresholds may be crossed by a ‘threshold’ effect in incremental values or a ‘sledgehammer’ effect from a large event, such as forest clearance. Localized ecological systems are known to shift abruptly and irreversibly across critical thresholds to new mean conditions outside the range of fluctuation of the previous state (Barnosky et al, 2012). Tipping points in the terrestrial biosphere can also cross continents if vegetation and atmosphere are tightly coupled, (Lenton et al. 2013), potentially becoming global if there are interrelated drivers acting on a global biological or ecological threshold, causing all locations to ‘tip’ simultaneously (Brook et al. 2013). Brook et al (2013) think this is unlikely given the heterogeneity of climate change and ecosystems. Jefferies et al. (2006) show that intercontinental biotic connectivity and coupled regime shifts have been demonstrated by intensive agriculture in western USA, causing dramatic losses of Arctic ecosystem structure and biogeochemical cycling due to increased populations of migrating snow geese, promoted by agricultural crop as increased food source. Similarly, coral reef ecosystems appear to have disappeared globally and suddenly at the Triassic–Jurassic transition, driven by global increase in CO2 causing increased ocean acidity and temperature (Brook et al. 2013).

What are the consequences?

Several extinction events have been linked to oceanic anoxic events, crossing the tipping point in which the onset of anoxia on shelf seas triggered is phosphorus recycling from sediments, fuelling a spread of anoxia, and Lenton et al. (2013) state that the effects on biodiversity were a consequence rather than an intrinsic part of the tipping mechanism. As well as this may be, feedback loops often mean that a biological forcing applied on one scale can cause a critical transition to occur on another scale, for example, anthropogenic selection for younger maturation of individual cod as a result of heavy fishing pressure; and cascades of ecological changes triggered by the removal of top predators (Barnosky et al. 2012). Lenton et al (2013) suggest that species richness is a poor and misleading indicator of Earth-system function, with minimal basis in ecological theory for identifying a number of unique species required to maintain the general health of the biosphere. They also point out the distinction between tipping points in climate or biogeochemical dynamics and subsequent ecological responses to them (Lenton et al. 2013).

To summarize, the terrestrial biosphere, in isolation, is not the right place to be looking for a planetary-scale tipping point; the complex coupled dynamics of the Earth system as a whole need to be assessed (Lenton et al, 2013). Many of the feedbacks, and their consequences for other systems and scales, in the face of changing global climate are as yet unknown. However, planetary scale critical transitions have occurred previously in the biosphere, and evidence suggests that humans are now forcing another such transition, potentially transforming Earth into an irreversible state unknown in human history (Barnosky et al. 2012). As Hobbs et al. (2006) suggest, ‘we should perhaps move away from the one-dimensional dichotomy between natural and human dominated to a more effective depiction of how human beings interact with nature’.

Barnosky et al. (2012) “Approaching a state shift in Earth’s Biosphere”, Nature, 486, 52-58
Brook, B.W. et al. (2013) "Does the terrestrial biosphere have planetary tipping points?" Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28, 396–401.

Cardinale, B.J. et al. (2012) "Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity". Nature 486, 59–67
Hobbs, R.J. et al. (2006) "Novel ecosystems: theoretical and management aspects of the new ecological world order". Global Ecology and Biogeography. 15, 1–7

Jefferies, R.L. et al. (2006) "A biotic agent promotes large-scale catastrophic change in the coastal marshes of Hudson Bay". Journal of Ecology. 94, 234–242

Lenton, T., M., and H. T. P. Williams (2013) “On the origin of planetary-scale tipping points, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28, 7, 380-382

Five Global Warming "Tipping Points"

This National Geographic article looks at 5 localities that are likely to change when we reach a tipping point relevant to that system, where crossing it would cause serious changes in some of Earth's system processes with knock-on effects on others. 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/03/photogalleries/tipping-points-climate-change/index.html 

Firstly, the Amazon Basin, where climate shifts may lead to less rainfall,huge loss of species diversity which would damage the forest's regulation of air quality, fresh water cycle, and atmospheric circulation.

Secondly, disruption on the Atlantic Meridional overturning circulation, preventing warm water from moving north and having a dramatic impact on ocean and terrestrial ecosystems, as well as affecting global climatic circulation.

Thirdly, a warming of 4 degrees C would cause massive melting of the Greenland ice sheet. An ice-free Greenland would cause up to 6 to 7 meters of sea-level rise, threatening up to 300 million people, as well as ecosystems, with harmful floods.

Fourth, some have suggested that the El Nino periodic shift in condition of the ocean and atmosphere in the tropical Pacific may become an almost permanent state, causing severe drought in Southeast Asia and the Amazon Basin and increased floods and changes in the marine food web along the South American Pacific coast.

Fifth, melting Antarctic ice could raise raise the world's sea level by up to 6 to 7 meters. The melting ice may reveal islands under the ice that are currently buried. Already fast moving ice streams have released large amounts of freshwater into surrounding oceans.

Planetary Boundaries and Tipping Points explained!

If you do any reading about "tipping points" you'll be bombarded with things like 'planetary boundaries', 'regime shifts', 'critical transitions' and just about every combination of these words. It can be a bit confusing! So I'm going to explain it in what I hope is a much clearer way....

Brook et al. (2013) describe the following:

· Planetary boundary: a concept developed to define a desired operating range for Earth-system features and processes. Crossing a boundary implies damage or loss of existing functions or services across the system.

· Regime shift: a large, relatively rapid reorganization of the state of an ecosystem that can be triggered by synergistic feedbacks. Regime shifts can result from crossing tipping points, and are often hard to anticipate and difficult to reverse.

· Tipping point: the critical point at which strong non-linearities appear in the relationship between ecosystem attributes and drivers; once a tipping point threshold is crossed, the change to a new state is typically rapid and might be irreversible or exhibit hysteresis.

Life on Earth has displayed abrupt and massive changes in the past, so we have no reason to expect that similar global regime shifts will not occur again. These shifts changed ecosystem dynamics worldwide by rising temperatures, changes in rainfall, retreat of polar ice and glaciers, and declining ocean pH amongst others, resulting in profound changes in ecosystem services, biodiversity, and aesthetic values. (Hughes et al. 2013). 

The problem is, not all these planetary boundaries and tipping points have been defined, and crossing these thresholds is unlikely to manifest as sudden and simultaneous collapses worldwide.What if we've already passed unrecognized and unanticipated tipping points as incremental changes accumulate, and are in a slow transition to a new regime? Once a transition occurs, it can be difficult or even impossible to return to the previous state (Barnosky et al, 2012).

This image from Barnosky et al (2012) shows a prediction of Earth ecosystem response as human population grows as does its impact on the environment. Here, the system crosses a tipping point and reaching an alternative stable state.

Human forcing includes transformation of 43% of land to agricultural or urban landscapes, with the remainder of natural landscapes broken up by roads. Even during the last global-scale critical transition, only 30% of Earth’s surface went from being covered by glacial ice to being ice free! Modelling suggests that for a third of Earth, plant species will not be able to migrate quick enough to keep up with climate change, and those that can will have to battle highly fragmented landscapes (Barnosky et al. 2012).

The scientific concept and potential policy implications of tipping points and their consequences have recently attracted considerable interest (Brook et al, 2013) and rightly so. Looking at past global-scale state shifts and the global forcings we continue to exert, suggests that another global-scale state shift is isn't far away, if it has not already begun (Barnosky et al, 2012). The extent and scale of human–biosphere interactions and disruption highlights the need to operate within safe planetary boundaries say Hughes et al, (2013). Regardless, we must address causes of human-driven global change and improve our management of the environment in order to prevent a global-scale state shift, or at least to monitor it as much as possible.

• Barnosky, A., D., Et Al. (2012) “Approaching a state shift in Earth’s Biosphere” Nature, 486, 52-58
• Brook, B.W. et al. (2013) Does the terrestrial biosphere have planetary tipping points? Trends Ecol. Evol. 28, 396–401
• Hughes, T., P., S. Carpenter, J. Rockstrom, M. Scheffer, and B. Walker (2013) “Multiscale regime shifts and planetary boundaries” Trends in Ecology & Evolution , 28, 7