Jingjing Zhang , Xingming Hao , Yongchang Liu , Xuewei Li , Qixiang Liang , Fan Sun , Mengtao Ci , Yupeng Li
{"title":"植被绿化对北半球生态系统恢复力的增强作用不显著","authors":"Jingjing Zhang , Xingming Hao , Yongchang Liu , Xuewei Li , Qixiang Liang , Fan Sun , Mengtao Ci , Yupeng Li","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113762","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Greening is asynchronous with ecosystem resilience in the context of vegetation restoration, thus highlighting the uncertainty in predicting the future sustainability of ecosystems. However, global evidence, to validate this inconsistency, remains limited. Here, we integrated Global Inventory Monitoring and Modeling Studies (GIMMS), Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), and global Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 Solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (GOSIF) multisource vegetation indices with a random forest model to demonstrate how resilience in Eurasia quantified using critical slowing down indicators has changed during 1984–2020. Resilience estimates derived from the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), kernel NDVI (kNDVI), Leaf Area Index (LAI), Gross Primary Production (GPP), and GOSIF exhibited similar spatial patterns and trends. Specifically, resilience was lower in water-limited regions and increased with higher aridity index values; it peaked in humid regions (AI > 0.65), with average values (quantified by <span><math><mrow><msub><mi>λ</mi><mrow><mi>A</mi><mi>C</mi><mn>1</mn></mrow></msub></mrow></math></span>) ranging from −2.20 to −2.00. While vegetation cover showed a general increasing trend, resilience simultaneously declined, particularly in semi-humid areas. Significant shifts in resilience trends occurred around 2005. Warming and variability in water conditions were identified as the main reasons for the decline in resilience in humid and arid regions, respectively. After the transition point, mean temperature contributed 28.8 %, 41.7 %, and 21.6 % to resilience in the arid, semi-arid, and humid zones, respectively. These findings provide valuable insights for comprehending and assessing the ecological impacts of global and regional climate change mitigation efforts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"177 ","pages":"Article 113762"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vegetation greening does not significantly enhance ecosystem resilience in the Northern Hemisphere\",\"authors\":\"Jingjing Zhang , Xingming Hao , Yongchang Liu , Xuewei Li , Qixiang Liang , Fan Sun , Mengtao Ci , Yupeng Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113762\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Greening is asynchronous with ecosystem resilience in the context of vegetation restoration, thus highlighting the uncertainty in predicting the future sustainability of ecosystems. However, global evidence, to validate this inconsistency, remains limited. Here, we integrated Global Inventory Monitoring and Modeling Studies (GIMMS), Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), and global Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 Solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (GOSIF) multisource vegetation indices with a random forest model to demonstrate how resilience in Eurasia quantified using critical slowing down indicators has changed during 1984–2020. Resilience estimates derived from the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), kernel NDVI (kNDVI), Leaf Area Index (LAI), Gross Primary Production (GPP), and GOSIF exhibited similar spatial patterns and trends. Specifically, resilience was lower in water-limited regions and increased with higher aridity index values; it peaked in humid regions (AI > 0.65), with average values (quantified by <span><math><mrow><msub><mi>λ</mi><mrow><mi>A</mi><mi>C</mi><mn>1</mn></mrow></msub></mrow></math></span>) ranging from −2.20 to −2.00. While vegetation cover showed a general increasing trend, resilience simultaneously declined, particularly in semi-humid areas. Significant shifts in resilience trends occurred around 2005. Warming and variability in water conditions were identified as the main reasons for the decline in resilience in humid and arid regions, respectively. After the transition point, mean temperature contributed 28.8 %, 41.7 %, and 21.6 % to resilience in the arid, semi-arid, and humid zones, respectively. These findings provide valuable insights for comprehending and assessing the ecological impacts of global and regional climate change mitigation efforts.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Indicators\",\"volume\":\"177 \",\"pages\":\"Article 113762\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Indicators\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X25006922\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X25006922","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Vegetation greening does not significantly enhance ecosystem resilience in the Northern Hemisphere
Greening is asynchronous with ecosystem resilience in the context of vegetation restoration, thus highlighting the uncertainty in predicting the future sustainability of ecosystems. However, global evidence, to validate this inconsistency, remains limited. Here, we integrated Global Inventory Monitoring and Modeling Studies (GIMMS), Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), and global Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 Solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (GOSIF) multisource vegetation indices with a random forest model to demonstrate how resilience in Eurasia quantified using critical slowing down indicators has changed during 1984–2020. Resilience estimates derived from the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), kernel NDVI (kNDVI), Leaf Area Index (LAI), Gross Primary Production (GPP), and GOSIF exhibited similar spatial patterns and trends. Specifically, resilience was lower in water-limited regions and increased with higher aridity index values; it peaked in humid regions (AI > 0.65), with average values (quantified by ) ranging from −2.20 to −2.00. While vegetation cover showed a general increasing trend, resilience simultaneously declined, particularly in semi-humid areas. Significant shifts in resilience trends occurred around 2005. Warming and variability in water conditions were identified as the main reasons for the decline in resilience in humid and arid regions, respectively. After the transition point, mean temperature contributed 28.8 %, 41.7 %, and 21.6 % to resilience in the arid, semi-arid, and humid zones, respectively. These findings provide valuable insights for comprehending and assessing the ecological impacts of global and regional climate change mitigation efforts.
期刊介绍:
The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published.
• All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices.
• New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use.
• Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources.
• Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators.
• Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs.
• How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes.
• Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators.
• Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.