Does within-biome drought sensitivity reflect patterns across biomes?

IF 2.3 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Sydney L Hedberg, Phuong D Dao, Alan K Knapp
{"title":"Does within-biome drought sensitivity reflect patterns across biomes?","authors":"Sydney L Hedberg, Phuong D Dao, Alan K Knapp","doi":"10.1007/s00442-025-05786-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Droughts are expected to increase in severity and frequency with climate change, and it is important to understand why some ecosystems are more sensitive to drought than others. Currently, there is considerable evidence that ecosystem sensitivity to drought, quantified by reductions in aboveground net primary production (ANPP), is negatively related to mean annual precipitation (MAP). Thus, arid ecosystems are more likely than mesic systems to experience dramatic reductions in productivity during drought. However, evidence for this pattern is primarily from studies that span multiple biomes making it difficult to discern if abiotic (MAP) or biotic factors (differences in plant communities) underlie this relationship. To disentangle these, we assessed patterns of drought sensitivity within a single biome, the semiarid shortgrass steppe of the western U.S., where the dominant vegetation varies minimally compared to cross-biomes studies. We used 23 years of satellite derived ANPP proxies, the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) and the Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI, 157,929 pixels, 1 km<sup>2</sup> resolution) with gridded precipitation data to assess relationships between drought sensitivity and MAP within this biome. Consistent with previous multi-biome studies, we found a negative, although relatively weaker, relationship between MAP (250-625 mm) and drought sensitivity within the shortgrass steppe. We conclude that while differences in vegetation types almost certainly contribute to patterns of drought sensitivity, the long-term precipitation history of an ecosystem (e.g. MAP) may also play a role in determining differences in drought sensitivity within ecosystems.</p>","PeriodicalId":19473,"journal":{"name":"Oecologia","volume":"207 9","pages":"146"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12367911/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oecologia","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-025-05786-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Droughts are expected to increase in severity and frequency with climate change, and it is important to understand why some ecosystems are more sensitive to drought than others. Currently, there is considerable evidence that ecosystem sensitivity to drought, quantified by reductions in aboveground net primary production (ANPP), is negatively related to mean annual precipitation (MAP). Thus, arid ecosystems are more likely than mesic systems to experience dramatic reductions in productivity during drought. However, evidence for this pattern is primarily from studies that span multiple biomes making it difficult to discern if abiotic (MAP) or biotic factors (differences in plant communities) underlie this relationship. To disentangle these, we assessed patterns of drought sensitivity within a single biome, the semiarid shortgrass steppe of the western U.S., where the dominant vegetation varies minimally compared to cross-biomes studies. We used 23 years of satellite derived ANPP proxies, the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) and the Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI, 157,929 pixels, 1 km2 resolution) with gridded precipitation data to assess relationships between drought sensitivity and MAP within this biome. Consistent with previous multi-biome studies, we found a negative, although relatively weaker, relationship between MAP (250-625 mm) and drought sensitivity within the shortgrass steppe. We conclude that while differences in vegetation types almost certainly contribute to patterns of drought sensitivity, the long-term precipitation history of an ecosystem (e.g. MAP) may also play a role in determining differences in drought sensitivity within ecosystems.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

生物群系内的干旱敏感性是否反映了整个生物群系的模式?
随着气候变化,干旱的严重程度和频率预计会增加,理解为什么一些生态系统比其他生态系统对干旱更敏感是很重要的。目前,有大量证据表明,以地上净初级生产量(ANPP)减少量化的生态系统对干旱的敏感性与年平均降水量(MAP)呈负相关。因此,干旱生态系统比湿润生态系统更有可能在干旱期间经历生产力的急剧下降。然而,这种模式的证据主要来自跨越多个生物群落的研究,这使得很难辨别这种关系是由非生物因素(MAP)还是生物因素(植物群落的差异)决定的。为了解开这些问题,我们评估了单一生物群系的干旱敏感性模式,即美国西部半干旱短草草原,与跨生物群系研究相比,优势植被变化最小。利用23年卫星反演的ANPP代理数据、标准化植被指数(NDVI)和增强植被指数(EVI, 157,929像素,1 km2分辨率)和网格化降水数据来评估该生物群系干旱敏感性与MAP之间的关系。与以往的多生物群系研究一致,我们发现在短草草原,MAP (250-625 mm)与干旱敏感性呈负相关,尽管相对较弱。我们的结论是,虽然植被类型的差异几乎肯定会影响干旱敏感性模式,但生态系统(如MAP)的长期降水历史也可能在决定生态系统内干旱敏感性差异方面发挥作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Oecologia
Oecologia 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
192
审稿时长
5.3 months
期刊介绍: Oecologia publishes innovative ecological research of international interest. We seek reviews, advances in methodology, and original contributions, emphasizing the following areas: Population ecology, Plant-microbe-animal interactions, Ecosystem ecology, Community ecology, Global change ecology, Conservation ecology, Behavioral ecology and Physiological Ecology. In general, studies that are purely descriptive, mathematical, documentary, and/or natural history will not be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信