Relationships Among Climate, Forests, and Insects in North America: Examples of the Importance of Long-Term and Broad-Scale Perspectives

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Relationships Among Climate, Forests, and Insects in North America: Examples of the Importance of Long-Term and Broad-Scale Perspectives 161 Relationships among climate, forests, and insects in North America: Examples of the importance of long-term and broad-scale perspectives Talbot Trotter1 Forest structure is strongly influenced by distur- they inhabit. The extensive body of available bance, agents of which can include fire, weather, research on forest insects, particularly economically mammals, annelids, fungi, insects, and increasingly important forest pests, further facilitates the study with the advent of the Anthropocene, climate. of these interactions in the context of anthro- Currently, climate change represents one of the pogenic climate change. broadest threats to natural systems, including forests, with the potential to directly alter forest As work continues to evaluate the interactions structure and function through mechanisms such as between a changing climate and forest insects, it is drought induced tree mortality (Allen et al., 2010), critical that the discussion extends beyond simple changes in tree species distribution (Allen and increases in mean temperature. While the popular Breshears, 1998; Neilson and Marks, 1994), densi- term ‘global warming’ captures the fundamental ty (Allen et al., 2010), and composition (Allen and process of anthropogenic changes in the global cli- Breshears, 1998; Mueller et al., 2005). mate (i.e. a net increase in mean global tempera- ture), it represents a gross generalization of local Although the direct effects of climate on trees often manifestations of climate change, and oversimpli- produce the most readily apparent changes to fies the impacts climatic variation may have on forested systems (i.e. tree mortality), climatic vari- forests and their associated insect communities. ation has the potential to indirectly alter forests by The 4th Assessment Report of Working Group 1 of changing community interactions, including myc- the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change orrhizal associations (Gehring et al., 1998; Gehring (IPCC 2007) summarizes some of the complex and Whitham, 1994), insect outbreak dynamics changes expected in the coming century. For exam- (McCloskey et al., 2009; Otvos et al., 1979; Santos ple, northern regions of North America may experi- and Whitham, 2010; White, 1976), and arthropod ence an increase in precipitation, particularly winter community structure (Trotter III, 2008). Insects in precipitation, while central regions of the continent particular provide an excellent opportunity to may become more arid. Changes in temperature are examine interactions among climate, forests, and also likely to vary seasonally and geographically, the communities they support, as insect communi- including the potential for much warmer winters, ties both structure (Eschtruth et al., 2006; Gandhi and only slightly warmer summers (see IPCC and Herms, 2009; Stadler et al., 2005) and are Working Group 1, 4th Assessment Report, section structured by (Trotter III et al., 2008) the forests 11.5.3 for additional information). Ongoing efforts to improve our understanding of the interactions 1 USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station. among forests, insects, and climate must recognize 162 Long-term Silvicultural and Ecological Studies the potential for complex, multidirectional interac- fiscellaria) and Dendroctonus beetles offer the tions which extend beyond increases in insect devel- opportunity to evaluate interactions among climate, opment rate and winter survival, and increased heat forests, and insects in the context of a long, shared stress resulting from warmer temperatures. Some evolutionary history. Invasive species such as the of the complex responses insect populations may hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae) offer a express due to projected changes in climate include: different set of research opportunities, as these organisms often arrive without their co-evolved i) Changes in the geographic distribution of an communities, and as a consequence may operate organism’s abiotic envelope, dispersal and/or under a set of ecologically simplified factors. Each colonization barriers, and climatic limits, as dis- of these examples highlights the challenges of cussed by Williams and Liebhold (1995) addressing the multiple, interrelated and interact- ing factors such as those listed above, and demon- ii) Changes in the length of the growing season, strate the difficulty of distinguishing cause-and- and concomitant shifts in voltanism (Hansen et effect relationships from correlative patterns. These al., 2001; Logan and Powell, 2001) systems also highlight the importance of expanding iii) Changes in the Moran Effect (the tendency for the use of long-term perspectives (as provided by large-scale processes to synchronize local historical records and paleoecological reconstruc- events), as discussed by Williams and Liebhold tions) and long-term studies and experiments to (1995) refine our understanding of these complex systems. iv) Changes in synchrony among hosts, predators, and parasites (Watt and McFarlane, 2002) Example 1: Native species and a long-term perspective, the hemlock looper (Lambdina fiscellaria) and the v) Changes in the relative strength and/or impor- Holocene tance of Allee Effects (the size below which pop- ulations tend to go locally extinct) The hemlock looper, an herbivorous Geometrid vi) Changes in host-stress and defensive chemistry moth with a broad geographic range, provides a particularly valuable opportunity to study long- vii) Changes in seasonal cues for diapauses, aestiva- term dynamics based on the discovery of head cap- tion, and quiescence sules found preserved in benthic sediments and viii) Changes in disturbance regime (fire, flood, peat in the boreal forests of North America avalanche, or other mechanical disturbance) (Anderson et al., 1986). Hemlock looper larvae feed on a variety of boreal species including fir ix) Changes in nutrient availability, including car- (Abies spp.), spruce (Picea spp.), larch (Larix spp.), bon enrichment, nitrogen mobilization in plant and hemlock (Tsuga spp.), and in the last century, tissues, etc. (White 1976) numerous outbreaks of the hemlock looper have x) Changes in migration necessity, timing, and cor- been documented in North America (McCloskey et ridors al., 2009; Otvos et al., 1979). Some of these out- breaks have resulted in the defoliation and mortali- xi) Changes in the distribution and abundance of ty of trees, leading to changes in forest structure host and herbivore genotypes, particularly those (McCarthy and Weetman, 2007). related to phenotypic plasticity and/or environ- mental tolerances. Paleoecological evidence suggests these document- ed, large-scale hemlock declines are not unprece- Here, three examples of interactions between dented. In the mid-Holocene, beginning around forests and herbivorous insects are described which 5500 yrs BP (14C years Before Present, Present = include some of the above climatic influences. 1950) hemlock populations underwent a major These examples include a foliage feeder, a wood reduction in both density and distribution (Allison borer, and a piercing-sucking insect, and represent et al., 1986; Anderson et al., 1986; Bhiry and Filion, both native and introduced species. Native forest 1996b; Foster et al., 2006; Haas and McAndrews, herbivores such as the hemlock looper (Lambdina 1999; Lavoie et al., 2009). Early studies describing Relationships among Climate, Forests, and Insects in North America 163 this decline cited pathogens as a likely mechanism (Davis, 1981), based on similar patterns of abruptly Reconstruction (via inference) of the mid-Holocene reduced pollen deposition observed for both hem- climate of eastern North America by Rolland et al. lock in the mid-Holocene, and in modern times, the (2008) suggests the period from roughly 5500 to American chestnut (Castanea dentata) following 4400 yrs BP was characterized by warm August the introduction of chestnut blight (Cryphonectria temperatures, and analyses by Yu et al. (1997), parasitica) (Allison et al., 1986). Later studies of Calcote (2003), Shuman et al. (2004), and Zhao et this decline, however, documented macrofossils of al. (Zhao et al., 2010) have shown that the mid- lepidopteran (Hemlock looper, and spruce buworm Holocene experienced a dry period relative to previ- Choristoneura fumiferana) head capsules and hem- ous centuries. The increase in summer tempera- lock foliage with damage indicative of feeding by tures in combination with increased water-stress the hemlock looper (Anderson et al., 1986; Bhiry may have exceeded the physical tolerances of hem- and Filion, 1996b) preserved in peat and benthic lock, or may have shifted the competitive advantage deposits. towards more xeric species. As a consequence, cli- mate may have lead directly to increased hemlock The discovery of these macrofossils has provided a mortality, reducing its abundance and distribution window into the history of herbivory, particularly at a landscape scale. Climate has frequently been the hemlock looper, in portions of North America cited as a direct driver of biogeographic change in through much of the Holocene (Anderson et al., biotic systems (Neilson and Marks, 1994), and 1986). Radiocarbon dating (14C) places the hem- there are numerous examples of changes in forest lock looper head capsules and herbivore damaged boundaries and structure driven directly by climatic hemlock foliage at the time of the hemlock decline, variability (Allen and Breshears, 1998; Mueller et roughly 4,910 ± 90 yrs BP (Bhiry and Filion, al., 2005). 1996b). In addition
Recommended publications
  • Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly, Neonympha Mitchellii Mitchellii French, in Southwestern Michigan
    Mitchell’s Satyr Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement This Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement, effective and binding on the date of last signature below, is between U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s East Lansing Field Office Project Leader and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Permittee: Scott Hicks, Project Leader U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service East Lansing Field Office 2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101 East Lansing, Michigan 48823 (517) 351-2555 The Service designates the following as the Agreement Contact: Laura Ragan, Recovery Coordinator U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Region 3 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990 Bloomington, Minnesota 55437-1458 Tracking Number: Summary of Purpose of the SHA: The purpose of this agreement is to outline conservation actions that participating property owners will implement and monitor on their enrolled properties for Mitchell’s satyr (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii). The goal of the agreement is to encourage property owners to engage in conservation actions for the Mitchell’s satyr that provide a net conservation benefit to recovery. 1.0 Introduction The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Safe Harbor Program (64 FR 32717) provides regulatory flexibility to non-federal landowners who voluntarily commit to implementing or avoiding specific activities, over a defined timeframe, that are reasonably expected to provide a net conservation benefit to species listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In exchange for this commitment, enrolled landowners (Cooperators) receive assurances from the Service that no additional future regulatory restrictions will be imposed or commitments required for species covered under a Safe Harbor Agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly, Neonympha Mitchellii Mitchellii French, in Southwestern Michigan
    Mitchell’s satyr butterfly (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Midwest Region East Lansing Field Office East Lansing, Michigan 5-YEAR REVIEW Species reviewed: Mitchell’s satyr butterfly (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. GENERAL INFORMATION .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Reviewers ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Methodology used to complete the review ...................................................................... 1 1.3 Background ...................................................................................................................... 2 2. REVIEW ANALYSIS........................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Application of the 1996 Distinct Population Segment (DPS) policy ............................... 3 2.2 Recovery Criteria ............................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Updated Information and Current Species Status ............................................................ 7 2.4 Synthesis......................................................................................................................... 25 3. RESULTS ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 16. Invasive Pests—Insects and Diseases 457
    chapteR 16. Invasive Pests—Insects and Diseases 457 Chapter 16. Invasive Pests—insects and Diseases Donald A. Duerr and Paul A. Mistretta1 key FindingS • A significant source of uncertainty in projecting pest impacts is the adequacy of prevention and suppression • Nonnative pest species have increasing impacts in the methods: how effective are existing methods, compared South regardless of climate change, patterns of land with those that might be available in the future; how ownership, or changes in the composition of vegetation. willing and able are land managers or landowners • “New” nonnative invasive insects and diseases will have to adopt management/control methods; how much serious impacts on southern forests over the next 50 years. funding is available compared to the amount needed for Some species such as emerald ash borer, laurel wilt, and implementation. thousand cankers disease are expanding rapidly; they • Under the influence of climate warming host plants, pests threaten the ecological viability of their hosts throughout and pest complexes are expected to migrate northward large areas of the South. and to higher elevations. Because migration rates differ • Given the trend in introductions of nonnative insect pests among the affected species, migrating plants are expected and plant pathogens over the last 100 years, we can expect to form new associations, which will then affect the pests, additional introductions of previously undocumented pests their host populations, and the interactions among them. (insects, fungal pathogens, plant parasitic nematodes, etc.) Unexpected pests very likely will become important, while from foreign countries that will have serious consequences some that are currently active will be less severe in their for some native forest plant species.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetable Production Handbook Contents
    VegetablePRODUCTION HANDBOOK for FLORIDA 2013-2014 DR. BIELINSKI M. SANTOS DR. GARY E. VALLAD Associate Professor of Horticulture, — editors — Associate Professor of Plant Pathology, Gulf Coast REC, IFAS, University of Florida Gulf Coast REC, IFAS, University of Florida Authors Daniel A. Botts, Director, Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association - Maitland Peter J. Dittmar, Assistant Professor, Horticultural Sciences Department - Gainesville Nicholas S. Dufault, Assistant Professor, Plant Pathology Department - Gainesville Michael D. Dukes, Associate Professor, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department - Gainesville Mary L. Lamberts, Extension Agent IV - Miami-Dade County - Homestead Guodong Liu, Assistant Professor, Horticultural Sciences Department - Gainesville Eugene McAvoy, Extension Agent IV, Hendry County, Labelle Joseph W. Noling, Professor, Citrus Research and Education Center - Lake Alfred Stephen M. Olson, Professor, North Florida Research and Education Center - Quincy Monica Ozores-Hampton, Assistant Professor, Southwest Florida Research and Education Center – Immokalee Mathews Paret, Assistant Professor, North Florida Research and Education Center - Quincy Natalia Peres, Associate Professor, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center - Wimauma Richard N. Raid, Professor, Everglades Research and Education Center - Belle Glade Pamela D. Roberts, Professor, Southwest Florida Research and Education Center - Immokalee Bielinski M. Santos, Assistant Professor, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center - Wimauma Eric H. Simonne, Professor, Office of District Extension Directors - Gainesville Hugh A. Smith, Assistant Professor, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center - Wimauma Scott A. Smith, Coordinator, Economic Analysis, Food and Resource Economics Department - Gainesville Crystal A. Snodgrass, Extension Agent I, Manatee County - Palmetto Gary E. Vallad, Associate Professor, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center - Wimauma Susan E. Webb, Associate Professor, Entomology and Nematology Department - Gainesville Alicia J.
    [Show full text]
  • Production Handbook of Florida
    Vegetableof PRODUCTION HANDBOOK FLORIDA 2015-2016 — editors — DR. PETER J. DITTMAR DR. JOSHUA H. FREEMAN DR. GARY E. VALLAD Assistant Professor of Horticulture, Assistant Professor of Horticulture, Associate Professor of Plant Pathology, Horticultural Sciences Department, North Florida REC, IFAS, University of Florida Gulf Coast REC, IFAS, University of Florida IFAS, University of Florida Authors Shinsuke Agehara, Assistant Professor, Gulf Coast Research & Education Center Nathan S. Boyd, Assistant Professor, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center - Wimauma Peter J. Dittmar, Assistant Professor, Horticultural Sciences Department - Gainesville Nicholas S. Dufault, Assistant Professor, Plant Pathology Department - Gainesville Michael D. Dukes, Associate Professor, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department - Gainesville Joshua H. Freeman, Assistant Professor, North Florida Research and Education Center - Quincy Guodong Liu, Assistant Professor, Horticultural Sciences Department - Gainesville Eugene McAvoy, Extension Agent IV, Hendry County, Labelle Christian F. Miller, Extension Agent I, Palm Beach County, Palm Beach Kelly T. Morgan, Associate Professor, Southwest Florida Research & Education Center Joseph W. Noling, Professor, Citrus Research and Education Center - Lake Alfred Monica Ozores-Hampton, Assistant Professor, Southwest Florida Research and Education Center – Immokalee Mathews Paret, Assistant Professor, North Florida Research and Education Center - Quincy Natalia Peres, Associate Professor, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center - Wimauma Richard N. Raid, Professor, Everglades Research and Education Center - Belle Glade Pamela D. Roberts, Professor, Southwest Florida Research and Education Center - Immokalee Eric H. Simonne, Professor, Office of District Extension Directors - Gainesville Hugh A. Smith, Assistant Professor, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center - Wimauma Crystal A. Snodgrass, Extension Agent I, Manatee County - Palmetto Phil Stansley, Professor, Southwest Florida Research & Education Center Gary E.
    [Show full text]
  • PRODUCTION HANDBOOK of FLORIDA 2017-2018
    Vegetable PRODUCTION HANDBOOK of FLORIDA 2017-2018 DR. GARY E. VALLAD DR. HUGH A. SMITH DR. PETER J. DITTMAR DR. JOSHUA H. FREEMAN Associate Professor of Plant Pathology, Assistant Professor of Entomology, Assistant Professor of Horticulture, Associate Professor of Horticulture, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Horticultural Sciences Dept., North Florida Research and Education Center, IFAS, University of Florida IFAS, University of Florida IFAS, University of Florida IFAS, University of Florida Welcome to the twenty-first edition of the Vegetable Production Handbook for Florida. This handbook is designed to provide Florida growers with the latest information on crop cultivars, cultural practices and pest management. TheWelcome provided toinformation the eighteenth is a result edition of cooperative of the Vegetable effort among & SmallState and Fruit County Production Extension Handbook and Research faculty to shareof Florida. expertise This and handbookadvice that iscan designed help growers to provide maximize Florida production, growers sustainability with the andlatest profits. informationon crop cultivars, cultural practices, and pest management. The handbook is available as individual chapters and in its entirety at the University of Florida Institute of Food and The information is a result of a cooperative effort among vegetable crop specialists and Agricultural Sciences EDIS website (edis.ifas.ufl.edu/topic_vph). Expanded content from previous handbooks and for county agents to share expertise and advice that can help growers maximize other relevant topics available through EDIS are listed in Chapter 1 along with QR codes for quicker access to EDIS sustainability and profi ts. content on your mobile device. A new Asian Vegetable chapter (Chapter 5) was added to help growers with the various namesThe handbookassociated withis available Asian Vegetable as individual crops and chapters reference and appropriate in its entirety pesticide at the information.
    [Show full text]