Close Menu
bkngpnarnaul
  • Home
  • Education
    • Biology
    • Chemistry
    • Math
    • Physics
    • Science
    • Teacher
  • E-Learning
    • Educational Technology
  • Health Education
    • Special Education
  • Higher Education
  • IELTS
  • Language Learning
  • Study Abroad

Subscribe to Updates

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Loading
What's Hot

University of Virginia President Resigns After Trump’s Demands

June 28, 2025

X-ray boosting fabric could make mammograms less painful

June 28, 2025

Wolfram Education Programs for Middle School, High School and Beyond—Wolfram Blog

June 28, 2025
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Sunday, June 29
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest Vimeo
bkngpnarnaul
  • Home
  • Education
    • Biology
    • Chemistry
    • Math
    • Physics
    • Science
    • Teacher
  • E-Learning
    • Educational Technology
  • Health Education
    • Special Education
  • Higher Education
  • IELTS
  • Language Learning
  • Study Abroad
bkngpnarnaul
Home»Chemistry»Modeling Forest Growth in a Changing Climate: Addressing the “Chicken-and-Egg” Paradox of Cause and Consequence
Chemistry

Modeling Forest Growth in a Changing Climate: Addressing the “Chicken-and-Egg” Paradox of Cause and Consequence

adminBy adminMay 30, 2025No Comments6 Mins Read0 Views
Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email WhatsApp Copy Link
Follow Us
Google News Flipboard Threads
Modeling Forest Growth in a Changing Climate: Addressing the “Chicken-and-Egg” Paradox of Cause and Consequence
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email Copy Link


Forests play a foundational role in maintaining ecological balance, regulating the Earth’s climate, and supporting economic and social well-being. As major carbon sinks, they store vast amounts of atmospheric CO₂, harbor diverse species, and provide critical goods and services for both human societies and natural ecosystems. Gaining a deep understanding of forest growth is essential for evaluating ecosystem integrity, guiding disturbance management, and anticipating how forests will respond to ongoing climate change. Yet, accurately predicting forest dynamics remains a formidable challenge. This complexity arises from intricate ecological processes, feedback mechanisms, and uncertainties linked to shifting climatic conditions. Moreover, legacy effects, such as the long-term impacts of previous climate extremes, land use, or forest management practices, can obscure cause-and-effect relationships by producing delayed, nonlinear impacts on forest growth and resilience.

This complexity has led to the development of numerous forest growth models, each with distinct assumptions and representations of key processes. Many models struggle to replicate recent trends in growth decline and mortality linked to climate extremes, emphasizing the need to reassess modeling approaches and underlying theories. A recently published article in Current Forestry Reports (Boukhris et al., 2025; http://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-025-00249-5) provides a comprehensive review of both established and emerging theoretical frameworks that have shaped forest growth modeling over the past two decades. In addition to synthesizing advances made in understanding and simulating forest growth processes, the paper also highlights key challenges and outlines promising future directions for research in this field.

 Evolution of Forest Growth Modeling

Historically, forest models have moved from empirical methods to mechanistic, process-based approaches grounded in conservation laws and causal relationships. While these models are praised for their robustness under non-stationary climates, many still fail to capture observed patterns of growth under stress and disturbance, revealing gaps in current understanding.

 The Boukhris et al. (2025) review explores 18 representative forest growth models, integrating theoretical foundations, empirical data, and emerging tools like machine learning. It assesses their ability to simulate forest dynamics under changing environmental conditions and suggests new directions for future research.

Forest Growth Theories

Tree growth, defined as biomass accumulation, involves cell division, expansion, and differentiation. Net growth at the stand or landscape level incorporates both biomass gain and losses from mortality and recruitment. Several theories explain how plants regulate growth:

  •  Functional Balance Theory: Growth depends on balancing resource supply with plant tissue demands.
  •  Local Determination Theory: Growth patterns aim to optimize resource capture.
  •  Optimality Principles: Plants allocate resources to maximize long-term fitness and short-term physiological efficiency.
  •  Coordination Theory: Internal regulation coordinates multiple processes in response to environmental conditions.

 Growth models generally follow two main paradigms: photosynthetic-centric (“source-driven”) and non-photosynthetic-centric (“sink-driven”).

 Photosynthetic-Centric Models

These models link growth directly to carbon assimilation through photosynthesis, minus respiration costs. Growth results from net photosynthesis, adjusted for maintenance and construction of tissues. Environmental variables like temperature, light, and nutrient availability are critical drivers.

 Examples include 3-PG, 3D-CMCC-FEM, LPJ-GUESS, SEIB-DGVM, and FATES. They use methods like Light Use Efficiency (LUE) or the Farquhar biochemical model to simulate photosynthesis. These models assume that limited photosynthesis constrains growth, reflecting the functional balance and local determination theories.

Non-Photosynthetic-Centric Models

These models emphasize the role of sinks, organs demanding resources, and how plants allocate resources based on physiological needs and stress responses. Growth is shaped not just by resource availability, but by the ability of tissues to use resources effectively. This approach supports optimality and coordination theories.

 Models like ForClim and LandClim fall into this category. They simulate growth through empirical relationships rather than direct photosynthesis, capturing long-term dynamics in resource-limited environments.

Source-Sink Integration

Some models integrate both paradigms, adjusting dynamically between source-driven and sink-limited behaviors depending on environmental stress. For instance, under optimal conditions, photosynthesis may dominate, while under stress, growth may depend more on non-structural carbon reserves. This hybrid approach acknowledges that both supply and demand control growth and improves model adaptability.

 

Modeling Growth Across Scales

Models vary in complexity and scale, from local stand-level simulations to global terrestrial ecosystem representations. They differ in temporal resolution, spatial detail, and process representation. The 18 models reviewed cluster into three major groups:

 

1. Stand-Scale Models

These models simulate fine-scale processes within forest stands, often using high-resolution time steps (daily or sub-daily). They track individual trees or cohorts and may include species competition and succession. Examples: ForClim, 3PGmix, 3D-CMCC-FEM. Their spatial simplicity limits application to broader-scale forest heterogeneity.

  2. Landscape-Scale Models

Operating at regional scales, these models integrate disturbances (e.g., fire, pests) and demographic processes (e.g., dispersal, establishment) across forest patches. They offer a balance between complexity and scalability but often simplify growth mechanisms. Examples: iLand, LandClim, LANDIS-II. Useful for regional forest planning, they are less accurate at simulating individual tree dynamics.

 3. Terrestrial Ecosystem-Scale Models

These large-scale models (e.g., LPJ-GUESS, FATES, CLM) simulate biome shifts, land-use change, and climate feedback. They use mechanistic representations of photosynthesis and carbon allocation but aggregate vegetation types, limiting their ability to simulate detailed forest processes. They are critical for assessing global carbon budgets but are less reliable for local management.

 Trade-Offs and Model Selection

Each modeling scale offers specific advantages and limitations. Stand-scale models provide high-resolution insights ideal for managed forests but lack landscape interactions. Landscape-scale models handle spatial heterogeneity and disturbances but simplify individual tree dynamics. Terrestrial models inform climate policy and global trends but cannot represent species-specific or stand-level dynamics. Selecting a model depends on the research goal, scale, and required detail.

 Conclusion and Future Directions

Forest growth modeling must navigate immense complexity, from physiological theory to ecosystem-scale feedbacks. Climate change amplifies these challenges, with models struggling to predict emerging dynamics, legacy effects, and nonlinear responses.

 However, integrating machine learning with process-based models offers a promising path forward. These tools can analyze vast datasets, uncover hidden patterns, and improve predictive power. Combining empirical learning with theoretical understanding may enhance model flexibility and ecological realism.

 Future efforts should prioritize interdisciplinary collaboration, improved data integration, and the development of models that dynamically balance source-sink interactions. As climate change reshapes forest ecosystems, adaptive and scalable modeling approaches will be essential for informed decision-making and effective conservation.



Source link

Addressing Changing ChickenandEgg climate Consequence Forest Growth Modeling Paradox
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email WhatsApp Copy Link
yhhifa9
admin
  • Website

Related Posts

Chemistry

Dynamic model captures loop flexibility in swine virus drug design

June 28, 2025
Chemistry

Estructuras de resonancia | ChemTalk

June 27, 2025
Chemistry

Sustainable gold extraction from ore and electronic waste

June 26, 2025
Chemistry

A brief guide to the types and uses of solvents

June 25, 2025
Chemistry

WATOC25 and its (Dr Who like) regeneration to Young WATOC25.

June 24, 2025
Chemistry

Photocatalytic 1,2-Thiosulfonylation of Alkenes with Thiophenols and Sulfonyl Chlorides Promoted by Directly Knitted Copper Polymers

June 23, 2025
Add A Comment
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Top Posts

10 Student Engagement Strategies That Empower Learners –

May 28, 20253 Views

Do You Hear What I Hear? Audio Illusions and Misinformation

May 28, 20253 Views

Improve your speech with immersive lessons!

May 28, 20252 Views

Arabic poetry, with a special focus on Palestine – Global Studies Blog

May 28, 20252 Views
Don't Miss

Open Access Week 2023–South Asia Resources

By adminJune 28, 20250

Open Access Week 2023 To suggest new content for SAOA, use the suggestion form. Source…

Best Abroad Study Consultants Near Me

June 27, 2025

Hayley’s Spring Semester in Maynooth

June 26, 2025

Study MD MS in UK Without PLAB

June 23, 2025
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • Vimeo

Subscribe to Updates

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Loading
About Us
About Us

Welcome to Bkngpnarnaul. At Bkngpnarnaul, we are committed to shaping the future of technical education in Haryana. As a premier government institution, our mission is to empower students with the knowledge, skills, and practical experience needed to thrive in today’s competitive and ever-evolving technological landscape.

Our Picks

University of Virginia President Resigns After Trump’s Demands

June 28, 2025

X-ray boosting fabric could make mammograms less painful

June 28, 2025

Subscribe to Updates

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Loading
Copyright© 2025 Bkngpnarnaul All Rights Reserved.
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.