TY - JOUR

T1 - Forestry contributed to warming of forest ecosystems in northern Germany during the extreme summers of 2018 and 2019

AU - Blumröder, Jeanette S.

AU - May, Felix

AU - Härdtle, Werner

AU - Ibisch, Pierre L.

N1 - Funding Information: The study was mainly funded through the project ‘Ecological and economic assessment of integrated nature conservation measures in forest management to ensure ecosystem services and forest ecosystem functioning () – Subproject 3: Ecological assessment and ecosystem services’ by the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) via the German Aerospace Center (DLR), grant number 01LC1603C and since 1 February 2021 via VDI/VDE Innovation + Technik GmbH (16LC1603C). PLI conceived together with JSB and supervised the study in the framework of his long‐term research program facilitated by the research professorships ‘Biodiversity and natural resource management under global change’ (2009–2015) as well as ‘Ecosystem‐based sustainable development’ (since 2015) granted by Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development. We thank Dietrich Mehl and the NABU foundation for providing the research area and the forestry commission office Lüttenhagen for supporting the work carried out in Heilige Hallen. We thank all students and volunteers who helped sampling the data. Gläserner Forst Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors. Ecological Solutions and Evidence published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.

PY - 2021/9

Y1 - 2021/9

N2 - Forest management influences a variety of ecosystem structures and processes relevant to meso- and microclimatic regulation, but little research has been done on how forest management can mitigate the negative effects of climate change on forest ecosystems. We studied the temperature regulation capacity during the two Central European extreme summers in 2018 and 2019 in Scots pine plantations and European beech forests with different management-related structural characteristics. We found that the maximum temperature was higher when more trees were cut and canopy was more open. Logging 100 trees per hectare increased maximum temperature by 0.21–0.34 K at ground level and by 0.09–0.17 K in 1.3 m above ground. Opening the forest canopy by 10% significantly increased T max, measured 1.3 m above ground by 0.46 K (including pine and beech stands) and 0.35 K (only pine stands). At ground level, T max increased by 0.53 K for the model including pine and beech stands and by 0.41 K in pure pine stands. Relative temperature cooling capacity decreased with increasing wood harvest activities, with below average values in 2018 (and 2019) when more than 656 (and 867) trees per hectare were felled. In the pine forests studied, the relative temperature buffering capacity 1.3 m above ground was lower than average values for all sample plots when canopy cover was below 82%. In both study years, mean maximum temperature measured at ground level and in 1.3 m was highest in a pine-dominated sample plots with relatively low stand volume (177 m 3 ha −1) and 9 K lower in a sample plot with relatively high stock volumes of Fagus sylvatica (>565 m 3 ha −1). During the hottest day in 2019, the difference in temperature peaks was more than 13 K for pine-dominated sample plots with relatively dense (72%) and low (46%) canopy cover. Structural forest characteristics influenced by forest management significantly affect microclimatic conditions and therefore ecosystem vulnerability to climate change. We advocate keeping the canopy as dense as possible (at least 80%) by maintaining sufficient overgrowth and by supporting deciduous trees that provide effective shade.

AB - Forest management influences a variety of ecosystem structures and processes relevant to meso- and microclimatic regulation, but little research has been done on how forest management can mitigate the negative effects of climate change on forest ecosystems. We studied the temperature regulation capacity during the two Central European extreme summers in 2018 and 2019 in Scots pine plantations and European beech forests with different management-related structural characteristics. We found that the maximum temperature was higher when more trees were cut and canopy was more open. Logging 100 trees per hectare increased maximum temperature by 0.21–0.34 K at ground level and by 0.09–0.17 K in 1.3 m above ground. Opening the forest canopy by 10% significantly increased T max, measured 1.3 m above ground by 0.46 K (including pine and beech stands) and 0.35 K (only pine stands). At ground level, T max increased by 0.53 K for the model including pine and beech stands and by 0.41 K in pure pine stands. Relative temperature cooling capacity decreased with increasing wood harvest activities, with below average values in 2018 (and 2019) when more than 656 (and 867) trees per hectare were felled. In the pine forests studied, the relative temperature buffering capacity 1.3 m above ground was lower than average values for all sample plots when canopy cover was below 82%. In both study years, mean maximum temperature measured at ground level and in 1.3 m was highest in a pine-dominated sample plots with relatively low stand volume (177 m 3 ha −1) and 9 K lower in a sample plot with relatively high stock volumes of Fagus sylvatica (>565 m 3 ha −1). During the hottest day in 2019, the difference in temperature peaks was more than 13 K for pine-dominated sample plots with relatively dense (72%) and low (46%) canopy cover. Structural forest characteristics influenced by forest management significantly affect microclimatic conditions and therefore ecosystem vulnerability to climate change. We advocate keeping the canopy as dense as possible (at least 80%) by maintaining sufficient overgrowth and by supporting deciduous trees that provide effective shade.

KW - Biology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85116532569&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/9ab6388f-7478-36d7-ac73-526fc96e34c6/

U2 - 10.1002/2688-8319.12087

DO - 10.1002/2688-8319.12087

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 2

JO - Ecological Solutions and Evidence

JF - Ecological Solutions and Evidence

SN - 2688-8319

IS - 3

M1 - e12087

ER -