Abstract

AbstractThe spatial overlap of multiple ecological disturbances in close succession has the capacity to alter trajectories of ecosystem recovery. Widespread bark beetle outbreaks and wildfire have affected many forests in western North America in the past two decades in areas of important habitat for native ungulates. Bark beetle outbreaks prior to fire may deplete seed supply of the host species, and differences in fire‐related regeneration strategies among species may shift the species composition and structure of the initial forest trajectory. Subsequent browsing of postfire tree regeneration by large ungulates, such as elk (Cervus canadensis), may limit the capacity for regeneration to grow above the browse zone to form the next forest canopy. Five stand‐replacing wildfires burned ~60,000 ha of subalpine forest that had previously been affected by severe (>90% mortality) outbreaks of spruce beetle (SB,Dendroctonus rufipennis) in Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) in 2012–2013 in southwestern Colorado. Here we examine the drivers of variability in abundance of newly established conifer tree seedlings [spruce and subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa)] and resprouts of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) following the short‐interval sequence of SB outbreaks and wildfire (2–8 yr between SB outbreak and fire) at sites where we previously reconstructed severities of SB and fire. We then examine the implications of ungulate browsing for forest recovery. We found that abundances of postfire spruce seedling establishment decreased substantially in areas of severe SB outbreak. Prolific aspen resprouting in stands with live aspen prior to fire will favor an initial postfire forest trajectory dominated by aspen. However, preferential browsing of postfire aspen resprouts by ungulates will likely slow the rate of canopy recovery but browsing is unlikely to alter the species composition of the future forest canopy. Collectively, our results show that SB outbreak prior to fire increases the vulnerability of spruce–fir forests to shifts in forest type (conifer to aspen) and physiognomic community type (conifer forest to non‐forest). By identifying where compounded disturbance interactions are likely to limit recovery of forests or tree species, our findings are useful for developing adaptive management strategies in the context of warming climate and shifting disturbance regimes.

Highlights

  • In the context of climate change, a central challenge is to understand how climate-sensitive disturbances, such as wildfire and bark beetle outbreaks, may drive ecological change (Turner 2010)

  • Postfire stems of all species were absent (i.e., 0 individuals/ha) in 74% of pre-fire conifer stands, whereas all stands in conifer–aspen forest type contained some postfire stems

  • By examining regeneration patterns across a gradient of SB outbreak severity, we show that reduced spruce seed sources increased the exposure of the spruce population to failed postfire recovery (Shinoda and Akasaka 2020) instead of any effect of the SB outbreak on fire severity

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In the context of climate change, a central challenge is to understand how climate-sensitive disturbances, such as wildfire and bark beetle outbreaks, may drive ecological change (Turner 2010). A reduction in the abundance of large trees due to a severe beetle outbreak would increase the relative abundance of small trees (Raffa et al 2008), and the proportion of the population exposed to ungulate browsing, potentially reducing the capacity for forest recovery. In this case, the pathway of processes explaining population resilience to a short-interval sequence of multiple disturbances may be more fully revealed by considering how a prior disturbance alters the proportion of a population exposed to a subsequent disturbance. Research examining pathways by which compounded disturbance interactions affect forest recovery is needed to anticipate future ecosystem dynamics (Turner 2010), resource management challenges (Vose et al 2016, 2018), and consequences for ecosystem services (Thom and Seidl 2015)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.