Tropical Grassland Ecosystems and Climate Change

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Tropical Grassland Ecosystems and Climate Change University of Kentucky UKnowledge International Grassland Congress Proceedings XXIII International Grassland Congress Tropical Grassland Ecosystems and Climate Change C. R. Babu University of Delhi, India Vivek Kr. Choudhary University of Delhi, India Vijay Kumar University of Delhi, India Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/igc Part of the Plant Sciences Commons, and the Soil Science Commons This document is available at https://uknowledge.uky.edu/igc/23/keynote/41 The XXIII International Grassland Congress (Sustainable use of Grassland Resources for Forage Production, Biodiversity and Environmental Protection) took place in New Delhi, India from November 20 through November 24, 2015. Proceedings Editors: M. M. Roy, D. R. Malaviya, V. K. Yadav, Tejveer Singh, R. P. Sah, D. Vijay, and A. Radhakrishna Published by Range Management Society of India This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Plant and Soil Sciences at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Grassland Congress Proceedings by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Tropical Grassland Ecosystems and Climate Change C.R. Babu, Vivek Kr. Choudhary and Vijay Kumar Grasses are unique group of flowering subalpine meadows are found in Himalaya plants that form the foundation for the trophic and are sustained by snow and grazing and structure in terrestrial communities. The burning, whereas the grassland of Sholas in grasses are found in every conceivable habitat Western Ghats are also unique and sustained where plants can thrive – from sea to deserts by grazing or burning. The grassy biomes and from wetlands to peaks of highest mentioned above are all on the upland. mountains. The grasses form a distinct biome Some of the tropical grasslands are located – a major ecological formation in the global on the: (i) flood plains of river systems (flood classification of vegetation. The grassland plain grasslands) and or the landslips, hilltops biomes are most widely spread worldwide and and forest margins. These are seral occupy 20% of the global land surface. The communities and sustained by flooding and grassland biomes are different in structure and grazing in case of flood plain grasslands and composition across the continents. The tropical grazing and burning in other grassland types. grassy biomes composed of a wide range of The grasslands in areas (where the rivers grassland communities depending upon shifted their courses) and the grasslands topographic, edaphic, moisture, biotic and (which are never subjected to flooding) are climatic gradients. Areas where grasses are sustained by grazing and or burning. In other predominant without scattered woody plant words in the absence of regulatory ecological species are known as open grasslands (natural processes (flooding and grazing) burning of grasslands). All those grasslands with grasslands is the key for sustaining the scattered woody plants (upto 80% of tree cover) grasslands. Grass-fire cycle is unique for are knows as savannas or mosaic grasslands. tropical grassy biomes and is critical in Similarly the Cerrados of Brazil are climax promoting grasses and suppresses the woody moist savannas and are maintained by grazing growth. In India there are three types of and burning. African savannas are very grasslands – short, intermediate and tall extensive and represent the climax vegetation grasslands. All the three seral stages of type with rich wildlife particularly ecological succession can be sustained by mammalian megafauna. These savannas are flooding, grazing and or burning. The annual short, medium and tall grasslands and are cycle of flooding and herbivore migration sustained by herbivore grazing and burning sustains network of the complex grassland and composed C4 grass species. These may be ecosystem of the Corbett Tiger Reserve of India natural, mosaic and derived. Derived that support rich wildlife. grasslands are those grasslands are transformed tropical forest through The grassland biomes render a wide range Savannization (cleared or repeatedly burned) of ecosystem services. For example, 15% of the and these are found in Amazonia and Asia. carbon on earth is stored in grasslands which Alpine and subalpine meadows in tropical and account 30% of total terrestrial net primary subtropical climates and grasslands of Sholas productivity; grasslands represent 85% of the in India are also climax type. The alpine and global land area burnt annually and contribute Proceedings of 23rd International Grassland Congress 2015-Keynote Lectures 371 Babu et al. to global carbon and energy cycles; 3 grasses and (vii) become source for CO2 rather than C alone provide 90% of world food and sink. livelihoods of 1/5 of global human population Elevated CO will render the grassy biomes depends directly on grasslands. Most of the 2 vulnerable, and C grasses could replace C mammalian megafauna of the earth are found 3 4 grasses with cascading effects on herbivores in grassland ecosystems. The environmental and fire regime. drivers for structuring the woody vegetation and community assembly in savannas are Elevated CO 2 will enhance the climate, atmospheric chemistry, fire, herbivory productivity by 15 – 20% and also enhance (particularly by large mammals) soil fertility soil carbon storage. The effect of elevated CO2 and the amount and seasonality of rainfall. on grassland ecosystem evapo-transportation and therefore on water stress will be rather Grassland ecosystems are most small. However that in C dominated threatened ecosystems across the world due to 4 grasslands where the elevated CO will anthropogenic mediated factors. For example: 2 enhance the biomass production of C grasses (i) damming of rivers and rivulets changed 4 because of increase in soil moisture but the C flooding patterns, (ii) the luxuriant grasslands 3 grass species will be unaffected. It has been are converted into woodlands or agricultural shown that the community composition of fields, (iii) intensive grazing led to grassland changes rapidly in response to desertification, and (iv) the indiscriminate elevated CO in warm season and if water stress burning result in depauperization of most of 2 occurs at the same time C grasses will take the grasslands in terms of species composition. 4 over C grasses. Under low nitrogen In most of the areas no new grasslands are 3 availability, the response to elevated CO will being established due to prevention of natural 2 be suppressed due to nitrogen limitation. In ecological processes that promote development the short term, the impact of elevated CO may of grassland ecosystems. 2 be reduced by increased nutrient use efficiency Based on studies carried out by different and increased nutrient uptake due to higher workers, using pot experiments, field plot root biomass at elevated CO2. In the long-term studies and simulation models, the following less nitrogen will be available due to slower likely impacts of climate change are predicted. decomposition of litter because of reduced litter Climate change – an increase in temperature availability. of 1 to 4 ÚC, changes in precipitation patterns, Responses of grassland ecosystem to elevated CO levels (400 ppm currently) and 2 climate change is critical in grazing animal extreme events such as droughts and floods – production efficiency as climate change will will have the following impacts on the tropical have impact on forage quality (nutritive value). grassland ecosystems. An increase of 1 to 4 ÚC in temperature will: (i) increase the aridity Forage quality depends on digestibility, protein and hence reduce the productivity and the soil and energy content, palatability, organic carbon, (ii) enhance the water stress, concentrations of minerals and anti-nutritional (iii) alter the distribution pattern of grassland factors, all of which are sensitivity to growing communities, (iv) decrease the palatability of conditions of grassland and elevated CO2. the herbage, (iv) enhance inflammability, (v) Foliage quality decreases at elevated CO2 promote dominance of drought tolerant species, because of higher C:N ratios, higher (vi) lead to extinction of moist loving species, concentrations of unpalatable/toxic 372 Proceedings of 23rd International Grassland Congress 2015-Keynote Lectures Tropical Grassland Ecosystems and Climate Change compound and also reduced mineral changes in the distribution of grasslands concentrations (except phosphorous). worldwide in response to climate change. Semi-arid grasslands will be severely affected Herbivory will also be affected due to through changes in grassland – woody species feedback to carbon acquisition and nutrient boundaries as C grasslands are increasingly cycling at elevated CO . Forage consumption 4 2 populated by C woody plants which are may increase as the quality declines; ruminants 3 favoured by elevated CO . Further, with and functional caecum animals will have 2 doubling of CO2 climate change a 40% increase reduced consumption and reduced in warm grasslands and a 50% decrease in cool productivity. Herbivory in turn will also affect grasslands are predicted. the nutrient cycling by changing the rate of decomposition and mineralization. The To sum up, on a large scale extensive reduced nitrogen content of plant tissues at species rich stable tropical grasslands are resilient to climate change, as the grasses have elevated CO 2 will reduced the rate of decomposition and hence slowing nutrient wide
Recommended publications
  • Tropical Deciduous Forests and Savannas
    2/1/17 Tropical Coastal Communities Relationships to other tropical forest systems — specialized swamp forests: Tropical Coastal Forests Mangrove and beach forests § confined to tropical and & subtropical zones at the interface Tropical Deciduous Forests of terrestrial and saltwater Mangrove Forests Mangrove Forests § confined to tropical and subtropical § stilt roots - support ocean tidal zones § water temperature must exceed 75° F or 24° C in warmest month § unique adaptations to harsh Queensland, Australia environment - convergent Rhizophora mangle - red mangrove Moluccas Venezuela 1 2/1/17 Mangrove Forests Mangrove Forests § stilt roots - support § stilt roots - support § pneumatophores - erect roots for § pneumatophores - erect roots for O2 exchange O2 exchange § salt glands - excretion § salt glands - excretion § viviparous seedlings Rhizophora mangle - red mangrove Rhizophora mangle - red mangrove Xylocarpus (Meliaceae) & Rhizophora Mangrove Forests Mangrove Forests § 80 species in 30 genera (20 § 80 species in 30 genera (20 families) families) § 60 species OW& 20 NW § 60 species OW& 20 NW (Rhizophoraceae - red mangrove - Avicennia - black mangrove; inner Avicennia nitida (black mangrove, most common in Neotropics) boundary of red mangrove, better Acanthaceae) drained Rhizophora mangle - red mangrove Xylocarpus (Meliaceae) & Rhizophora 2 2/1/17 Mangrove Forests § 80 species in 30 genera (20 families) § 60 species OW& 20 NW Four mangrove families in one Neotropical mangrove community Avicennia - Rhizophora - Acanthanceae Rhizophoraceae
    [Show full text]
  • Neotropical Rainforest Restoration: Comparing Passive, Plantation and Nucleation Approaches
    UC Riverside UC Riverside Previously Published Works Title Neotropical rainforest restoration: comparing passive, plantation and nucleation approaches Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4hf3v06s Journal BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, 25(11) ISSN 0960-3115 Authors Bechara, Fernando C Dickens, Sara Jo Farrer, Emily C et al. Publication Date 2016-10-01 DOI 10.1007/s10531-016-1186-7 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Biodivers Conserv DOI 10.1007/s10531-016-1186-7 REVIEW PAPER Neotropical rainforest restoration: comparing passive, plantation and nucleation approaches 1,2 2 2 Fernando C. Bechara • Sara Jo Dickens • Emily C. Farrer • 2,3 2 2,4 Loralee Larios • Erica N. Spotswood • Pierre Mariotte • Katharine N. Suding2,5 Received: 17 April 2016 / Revised: 5 June 2016 / Accepted: 25 July 2016 Ó Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 Abstract Neotropical rainforests are global biodiversity hotspots and are challenging to restore. A core part of this challenge is the very long recovery trajectory of the system: recovery of structure can take 20–190 years, species composition 60–500 years, and reestablishment of rare/endemic species thousands of years. Passive recovery may be fraught with instances of arrested succession, disclimax or emergence of novel ecosystems. In these cases, active restoration methods are essential to speed recovery and set a desired restoration trajectory. Tree plantation is the most common active approach to reestablish a high density of native tree species and facilitate understory regeneration. While this approach may speed the successional trajectory, it may not achieve, and possibly inhibit, a long-term restoration trajectory towards the high species diversity characteristic of these forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest--Savanna Transition Zones
    Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Biogeosciences Discuss., 11, 4591–4636, 2014 Open Access www.biogeosciences-discuss.net/11/4591/2014/ Biogeosciences BGD doi:10.5194/bgd-11-4591-2014 Discussions © Author(s) 2014. CC Attribution 3.0 License. 11, 4591–4636, 2014 This discussion paper is/has been under review for the journal Biogeosciences (BG). Forest–savanna Please refer to the corresponding final paper in BG if available. transition zones Structural, physiognomic and E. M. Veenendaal et al. aboveground biomass variation in Title Page savanna-forest transition zones on three Abstract Introduction continents. How different are Conclusions References co-occurring savanna and forest Tables Figures formations? J I E. M. Veenendaal1, M. Torello-Raventos2, T. R. Feldpausch3, T. F. Domingues4, J I 5 3 2,25 3,6 7 8 F. Gerard , F. Schrodt , G. Saiz , C. A. Quesada , G. Djagbletey , A. Ford , Back Close J. Kemp9, B. S. Marimon10, B. H. Marimon-Junior10, E. Lenza10, J. A. Ratter11, L. Maracahipes10, D. Sasaki12, B. Sonké13, L. Zapfack13, D. Villarroel14, Full Screen / Esc M. Schwarz15, F. Yoko Ishida6,16, M. Gilpin3, G. B. Nardoto17, K. Affum-Baffoe18, L. Arroyo14, K. Bloomfield3, G. Ceca1, H. Compaore19, K. Davies2, A. Diallo20, Printer-friendly Version N. M. Fyllas3, J. Gignoux21, F. Hien20, M. Johnson3, E. Mougin22, P. Hiernaux22, Interactive Discussion T. Killeen14,23, D. Metcalfe8, H. S. Miranda17, M. Steininger24, K. Sykora1, M. I. Bird2, J. Grace4, S. Lewis3,26, O. L. Phillips3, and J. Lloyd16,27 4591
    [Show full text]
  • Changes in Global Terrestrial Live Biomass Over the 21St Century
    advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/7/27/eabe9829/DC1 Supplementary Materials for Changes in global terrestrial live biomass over the 21st century Liang Xu, Sassan S. Saatchi*, Yan Yang, Yifan Yu, Julia Pongratz, A. Anthony Bloom, Kevin Bowman, John Worden, Junjie Liu, Yi Yin, Grant Domke, Ronald E. McRoberts, Christopher Woodall, Gert-Jan Nabuurs, Sergio de-Miguel, Michael Keller, Nancy Harris, Sean Maxwell, David Schimel *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] Published 2 July 2021, Sci. Adv. 7, eabe9829 (2021) DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abe9829 This PDF file includes: Figs. S1 to S10 Tables S1 to S7 Supplementary Materials Supplementary Figures & Tables Fig. S1. Flow chart of procedures estimating global live biomass carbon stocks. It includes the organizations of input data forming training samples for regional and spatio-temporal models, spatially continuous annual remote sensing data sets as predictor layers, the models used, and the final output products at 10km resolution. Fig. S2. Ecoregion maps used in this study. (A) Regional land cover types by separating the biomes based on continents; (B) Combined land cover types aggregated to a total of 5 vegetation classes globally. Maps were derived from the MODIS IGBP (International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme) land cover product. We selected the data in 2001 as the base map for the inclusion of forest clearing and fire events in their original classes. Detailed description of each class can be found in Table S1. Fig. S3. Regional carbon stock series from 2000 to 2019. The land cover classes were derived from MODIS LC product (Fig. S2) and divided continentally to show regional effects.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tropical Rainforest Grades K-2 and 3-5 Through the Activities Provided, Children Are Introduced to the Components of the Rainforest
    Activity The Tropical Packet Rainforest Table Introduction to the Teacher Activity Packets 3 of Contents Meeting the Needs of the NYC Teacher 6 Introduction to the Rainforest 8 Concepts, Objectives and Vocabulary for Grades K - 2 10 Concepts, Objectives and Vocabulary for Grades 3 - 5 12 Pre-trip Activities: Grades K - 2 1. What is a Rainforest? 14 2. What Does a Rainforest Look Like? 16 3. What Lives in a Rainforest? 19 4. Endangered Animals of the Rainforests 22 5. Rainforest Products 30 6. Fruit from the Rainforest 33 Grades 3 - 5 7. Where are Rainforests Found? 35 8. Life in the Layers of the Rainforest 39 9. People of the Rainforest 43 10. The Costs of Extinction 47 11. How Fast is Extinction Happening? 49 12. Saving the Rainforest 53 13. Bromeliads are Products of the Rainforest 55 What to do after your trip to the Zoo 57 References for the Rainforest 59 Feedback Questionnaire 60 Funding for Activity Packets provided by: • SI Bank and Trust Community Foundation • In memory of Norbert H. Leeseberg 1 STATEN ISLAND ZOO Acknowledgements Thanks to the following people involved in the two - year development of the Teacher Guides and Student Activity Packets. These packets are a symbol of the Staten Island Zoological Society’s dedication to provide science education to the children of the New York City and surrounding area. Clay Wollney............Curriculum Writer Harry Strano III....... Director of Education, Editor Karin Jakubowski... Former Assistant Director of Education, Editor Lorraine Austin........Former Director of Education, Editor Ellen Palm...............Graphics Coordinator, Designer and Illustrator Wendy Jackelow......Illustrator We are grateful to Vincent N.
    [Show full text]
  • Classification and Description of World Formation Types
    United States Department of Agriculture Classification and Description of World Formation Types Don Faber-Langendoen, Todd Keeler-Wolf, Del Meidinger, Carmen Josse, Alan Weakley, David Tart, Gonzalo Navarro, Bruce Hoagland, Serguei Ponomarenko, Gene Fults, Eileen Helmer Forest Rocky Mountain General Technical Service Research Station Report RMRS-GTR-346 August 2016 Faber-Langendoen, D.; Keeler-Wolf, T.; Meidinger, D.; Josse, C.; Weakley, A.; Tart, D.; Navarro, G.; Hoagland, B.; Ponomarenko, S.; Fults, G.; Helmer, E. 2016. Classification and description of world formation types. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-346. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 222 p. Abstract An ecological vegetation classification approach has been developed in which a combi- nation of vegetation attributes (physiognomy, structure, and floristics) and their response to ecological and biogeographic factors are used as the basis for classifying vegetation types. This approach can help support international, national, and subnational classifica- tion efforts. The classification structure was largely developed by the Hierarchy Revisions Working Group (HRWG), which contained members from across the Americas. The HRWG was authorized by the U.S. Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) to devel- op a revised global vegetation classification to replace the earlier versions of the structure that guided the U.S. National Vegetation Classification and International Vegetation Classification, which formerly relied on the UNESCO (1973) global classification (see FGDC 1997; Grossman and others 1998). This document summarizes the develop- ment of the upper formation levels. We first describe the history of the Hierarchy Revisions Working Group and discuss the three main parameters that guide the clas- sification—it focuses on vegetated parts of the globe, on existing vegetation, and includes (but distinguishes) both cultural and natural vegetation for which parallel hierarchies are provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Tropical Dry Forest Diversity, Climatic Response, and Resilience in a Changing Climate
    Review Tropical Dry Forest Diversity, Climatic Response, and Resilience in a Changing Climate Kayla Stan and Arturo Sanchez-Azofeifa * Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alberta, 1-26 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB T6G 2E7, Canada; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-780-492-1822 Received: 9 April 2019; Accepted: 22 May 2019; Published: 23 May 2019 Abstract: Central and South America tropical dry forest (TDF) is a water-limited biome with a high number of endemic species and numerous ecosystem services which has experienced a boom in research in the last decade. Although the number of case studies across these seasonal, water-limited, tropical forests has increased, there has not been a comprehensive review to assess the physiological variability of this biome across the continent and assess how these forests respond to climatic variables. Additionally, understanding forest change and resilience under climatic variability, currently and in the future, is essential for assessing the future extent and health of forests in the future. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to provide a literature review on the variability of TDF diversity and structure across a latitudinal gradient and to assess how these components respond to differences in climatic variables across this geographic area. We first assess the current state of understanding of the structure, biomass, phenological cycles, and successional stages across the latitudinal gradient. We subsequently review the response of these five areas to differences in precipitation, temperature, and extreme weather events, such as droughts and hurricanes. We find that there is a range of adaptability to precipitation, with many areas exhibiting drought tolerance except under the most extreme circumstances, while being susceptible to damage from increased extreme precipitation events.
    [Show full text]
  • Tropical Peatlands of Southeast Asia
    Tropical peatlands of Southeast Asia: Functions, threats and the role of fire in climate change mitigation Matthew Warren [email protected] USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station Tropical peat swamp forests are ecologically diverse Tropical wetland forests Structurally similar to other upland tropical wet forests. Hydric conditions drive ecosystem processes and functions, supporting unique biological communities physically and physiologically adapted to the anaerobic soil environment. Southeast Asia: The global center of tropical peatlands About 44.1 Mha of tropical peatlands ~11% of the total peatland area; volume is ~18 -25% (Page et al. 2011). About 25 Mha (56%) of tropical peatlands occur in SE Asia. Indonesia contains around 47% (Page et al. 2011). TRUE EXTENT? Miettinen et al. 2011 Posa et al. (2011) Extensive peatlands occur in Sumatra, Borneo, and W. Papua (not shown) Posa et al. 2011 Ecosystem Services Environmental functions that support human well-being - Supporting: Primary production, nutrient cycling, soil maintenance - Provisioning: Food, water, fiber, timber, fuel, medicine, NTFP’s - Regulating: Climate, floods, sedimentation, drought, disease - Cultural: Aesthetic, spiritual, recreational, educational, ecotourism - Biological: Unique biodiversity, genetic and biochemical resources Hydrological Regulation Faiz Rahman $ustenance Timber • Local construction • Commercial extraction • Fuel wood • Charcoal Biological Diversity Many flagship species for conservation find refuge in wetland forests. Countless plants, fungi, fish and insects remain poorly known or undescribed. B. Kauffman ZSL- Berbak Orangutan Tropical Peatland Project: www.outrop.com Carbon Storage • Tropical wetlands store more C per ha than any other tropical forest type • Tropical peatlands store about 88.6 Gt C, 15-19% of global peat C pool • Estimates range from about 2000-3000 Mg C/ha, average 2009 MgC/ha globally (Page et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Forest Biodiversity, Carbon and Other Ecosystem Services: Relationships and Impacts of Deforestation and Forest Degradation
    Chapter 2 Forest biodiversity, carbon and other ecosystem services: relationships and impacts of deforestation and forest degradation Coordinating lead author: Ian D. Thompson Lead authors: Joice Ferreira, Toby Gardner, Manuel Guariguata, Lian Pin Koh, Kimiko Okabe, Yude Pan, Christine B. Schmitt and Jason Tylianakis Contributing authors: Jos Barlow, Valerie Kapos, Werner A. Kurz, John A. Parrotta, Mark D. Spalding and Nathalie van Vliet CONTENTS Abstract 22 2.1 Introduction 22 2.2 The relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning 22 2.2.1 Biodiversity and ecosystem resistance and resilience 23 2.2.2 Ecological thresholds and safe operating space for management 24 2.2.3 The relationship between forest area and biodiversity 24 2.3 The relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem goods and services 24 2.3.1 Biodiversity and carbon sequestration and storage in forests 26 2.4 Biodiversity and carbon in major (sub-)tropical forest types 27 2.4.1 Definition and distribution of (sub-)tropical forest types 27 2.4.2 Spatial patterns of biodiversity in (sub-)tropical forest types 27 2.4.3 Spatial patterns of carbon in (sub-)tropical forest types 30 2.4.4 Congruence between carbon density and species richness across different scales and ecological zones 31 2.5 Effects of deforestation and forest degradation on carbon and biodiversity 31 2.5.1 Causes of global deforestation and forest degradation 31 2.5.2 Impacts of deforestation and forest degradation on carbon 32 2.5.3 Impacts of deforestation and forest degradation on biodiversity
    [Show full text]
  • Ecophysiology of Forest and Savanna Vegetation
    UC Irvine Faculty Publications Title Ecophysiology of forest and savanna vegetation Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8n74q3gq Journal Amazonia and Global Change, n/a(n/a) Authors Lloyd, J. Goulden, M. L. Ometto, J. P. et al. Publication Date 2013-03-21 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Ecophysiology of Forest and Savanna Vegetation J. Lloyd,1 M. L. Goulden,2 J. P. Ometto,3 S. Patiño,4 N. M. Fyllas,1 and C. A. Quesada5 Ecophysiological characteristics of forest and savanna vegetation are compared in an attempt to understand how physiological differences within and between these vegetation types relate to their geographical distributions. A simple ordination first shows that although precipitation exerts a key effect on Amazonian vegetation distributions, soil characteristics are also important. In particular, it is found that under similar precipitation regimes, deciduous forests tend to occur on more fertile soils than do cerrado vegetation types. A high subsoil clay content is also important in allowing the existence of semievergreen forests at only moderate rainfall. Such observations are consistent with biome specific physiological characteristics. For example, deciduous trees have higher nutrient requirements than do evergreen ones which also tend to have characteristics associated with severe water deficits such as a low specific leaf area. Nutrient contents and photosynthetic rates are lower than for savanna than for forest species with several ecosystem characteristics suggesting a primary limitation of nitrogen on savanna productivity. By contrast, phosphorus seems to constrain the productivity of most Amazonian forest types.
    [Show full text]
  • Tropical Forest Community Ecology
    TROPICAL FOREST COMMUNITY ECOLOGY Editors Walter P. Carson University of Pittsburgh Department of Biological Sciences Pittsburgh, PA USA Stefan A. Schnitzer University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee Department of Biological Sciences Milwaukee, WI USA and Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute Apartado 0843-03092, Balboa Republic of Panama Erica Schwarz CARSON: “carson_c000” — 2008/5/15 — 10:32 — page iii — #3 This edition first published 2008 ©2008 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell’s publishing program has been merged with Wiley’s global Scientific, Technical and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell. Registered office John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK. Editorial offices 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030-5774, USA For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell. The right of the Walter P. Carson and Stefan A. Schnitzer to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Cycling and Storage in Mangrove Forests
    MA06CH09-Alongi ARI 5 November 2013 13:55 Carbon Cycling and Storage in Mangrove Forests Daniel M. Alongi Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville 4810, Australia; email: [email protected] Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 2014. 6:195–219 Keywords The Annual Review of Marine Science is online at carbon sequestration, coastal ecosystem, mineralization, primary marine.annualreviews.org production, tropical wetlands This article’s doi: 10.1146/annurev-marine-010213-135020 Abstract Copyright c 2014 by Annual Reviews. Mangroves are ecologically and economically important forests of the trop- All rights reserved ics. They are highly productive ecosystems with rates of primary production equal to those of tropical humid evergreen forests and coral reefs. Although Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 2014.6:195-219. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org mangroves occupy only 0.5% of the global coastal area, they contribute 10– 15%(24TgCy−1) to coastal sediment carbon storage and export 10–11% of the particulate terrestrial carbon to the ocean. Their disproportionate contri- Access provided by Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) on 05/22/18. For personal use only. bution to carbon sequestration is now perceived as a means for conservation and restoration and a way to help ameliorate greenhouse gas emissions. Of immediate concern are potential carbon losses to deforestation (90–970 Tg Cy−1) that are greater than these ecosystems’ rates of carbon storage. Large reservoirs of dissolved inorganic carbon in deep soils, pumped via subsurface pathways to adjacent waterways, are a large loss of carbon, at a potential rate up to 40% of annual primary production.
    [Show full text]