Advertisement

Trees

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 183–192 | Cite as

Size matters—a comparison of three methods to assess age- and size-dependent climate sensitivity of trees

  • Mario TrouillierEmail author
  • Marieke van der Maaten-Theunissen
  • Tobias Scharnweber
  • David Würth
  • Andreas Burger
  • Martin Schnittler
  • Martin Wilmking
Original Article

Abstract

Key message

Changes in tree’s climate sensitivity during their ontogenetic development is best assessed with stem diameter classes, which can be calculated retrospectively from the cumulative ring width.

Abstract

Climate affects tree growth but the effect size can be modulated by other variables, including tree’s age and size. To assess how climate sensitivity changes over the life of a tree, previous studies mostly stratified trees into age classes, while cambial ring-age stratification (age-band decomposition) was less frequently used. However, trees do not age as other organisms and arguably age is mainly a proxy for size, which in contrast to age has been shown to affect wood anatomy and physiology. Stem diameter classes, calculated from cumulative ring width, could thus facilitate a more direct assessment of size effects. Here we compare these three methods, which differ regarding how they stratify data into age/size classes. We found that using age-band decomposition and cumulative ring-width classes had major advantages over the tree-age method: (a) age and size are decoupled from other temporal changes, like atmospheric CO2 concentration or nitrogen deposition, which excludes potential biases. (b) Shifts in climate sensitivity occur earlier than estimated by the tree-age method. (c) Younger/smaller classes can be assessed. Furthermore, direct comparison supports that size, rather than age, alters climate sensitivity. Therefore, the cumulative ring-width method appears to be the best approach to assess the effect of ontogenetic changes on a tree’s climate sensitivity. Understanding how climate sensitivity changes when trees get older and larger is important for forest ecology and management, climate reconstructions, global carbon models and can help to study age and height limitations of trees.

Keywords

Dendrochronology Climate sensitivity Tree age Tree height Hydraulic limitation hypothesis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This project was funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) within the Research Training Group RESPONSE (DFG RTG 2010). We would like to thank Glenn Juday, Ryan Jess, and Jamie Hollingsworth for supporting our work and their expertise. Furthermore, we thank Jelena Lange, Renate Hefner, Franziska Eichhorn and Brook Anderson for their assistance during fieldwork, and two anonymous reviewers for comments that helped improving an earlier version of this manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

We declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Data archiving

All data will be uploaded to the international tree-ring database (ITRDB).

Supplementary material

468_2018_1767_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (3.5 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 3598 KB)

References

  1. Allen CD, Macalady AK, Chenchouni H et al (2010) A global overview of drought and heat-induced tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. For Ecol Manag 259:660–684.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.09.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Babst F, Alexander MR, Szejner P et al (2014) A tree-ring perspective on the terrestrial carbon cycle. Oecologia 176:307–322.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-014-3031-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw.  https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 Google Scholar
  4. Beguería S, Vicente-Serrano SM (2013) SPEI: calculation of the standardised precipitation-evapotranspiration index. R Package Version 1Google Scholar
  5. Bond BJ (2000) Age-related changes in photosynthesis of woody plants. Trends Plant Sci 5:349–353.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1360-1385(00)01691-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bond BJ, Czarnomski NM, Cooper C et al (2007) Developmental decline in height growth in Douglas-fir. Tree Physiol 27:441–453.  https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/27.3.441 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bontemps J-D, Esper J (2011) Statistical modelling and RCS detrending methods provide similar estimates of long-term trend in radial growth of common beech in north-eastern France. Dendrochronologia 29:99–107.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2010.09.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bottero A, D’Amato AW, Palik BJ et al (2017) Density-dependent vulnerability of forest ecosystems to drought. J Appl Ecol.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12847 Google Scholar
  9. Bowman DMJS, Brienen RJW, Gloor E et al (2013) Detecting trends in tree growth: not so simple. Trends Plant Sci 18:11–17.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2012.08.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Briffa KR, Jones PD, Schweingruber FH et al (1996) Tree-ring variables as proxy-climate indicators: problems with low-frequency signals. In: Climatic variations and forcing mechanisms of the last 2000 years. Springer, Berlin, pp 9–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Briffa KR, Schweingruber FH, Jones PD et al (1998) Trees tell of past climates: but are they speaking less clearly today? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 353:65–73.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1998.0191 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Briffa KR, Osborn T, Schweingruber F et al (2001) Low-frequency temperature variations from a northern tree ring density. J Geophys Res.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900617 Google Scholar
  13. Bunn AG (2008) A dendrochronology program library in R (dplR). Dendrochronologia 26:115–124.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2008.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Callaway RM, Walker LR (1997) Competition and facilitation: a synthetic approach to interactions in plant communities. Ecology 78:1958–1965.  https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(1997)078%5B1958:CAFASA%5D2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carrer M, Urbinati C (2004) Age-dependent tree-ring growth responses to climate in Larix decidua and Pinus cembra. Ecology 85:730–740.  https://doi.org/10.1890/02-0478 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carrer M, von Arx G, Castagneri D, Petit G (2015) Distilling allometric and environmental information from time series of conduit size: the standardization issue and its relationship to tree hydraulic architecture. Tree Physiol 35:27–33.  https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpu108 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cook ER, Kairiukstis LA (eds) (1990) Methods of dendrochronology. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  18. D’Arrigo R, Wilson R, Liepert B, Cherubini P (2008) On the ‘Divergence Problem’ in Northern Forests: a review of the tree-ring evidence and possible causes. Glob Planet Change 60:289–305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2007.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Day ME, Greenwood MS, Diaz-Sala C (2002) Age- and size-related trends in woody plant shoot development: regulatory pathways and evidence for genetic control. Tree Physiol 22:507–513.  https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/22.8.507 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Deslauriers A, Morin H, Urbinati C, Carrer M (2003) Daily weather response of balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.) stem radius increment from dendrometer analysis in the boreal forests of Québec (Canada). Trees 17:477–484.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-003-0260-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Esper J, Niederer R, Bebi P, Frank D (2008) Climate signal age effects—evidence from young and old trees in the Swiss Engadin. For Ecol Manag 255:3783–3789.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.03.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eusemann P, Schnittler M, Nilsson RH et al (2016) Habitat conditions and phenological tree traits overrule the influence of tree genotype in the needle mycobiome—Picea glauca system at an arctic treeline ecotone. New Phytol 211:1221–1231.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13988 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fritts HC (1976) Tree rings and climate. The Blackburn Press, CaldwellGoogle Scholar
  24. Gärtner H, Nievergelt D (2010) The core-microtome: a new tool for surface preparation on cores and time series analysis of varying cell parameters. Dendrochronologia 28:85–92.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2009.09.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gleason KE, Bradford JB, Bottero A et al (2017) Competition amplifies drought stress in forests across broad climatic and compositional gradients. Ecosphere.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1849 Google Scholar
  26. Harsch MA, Bader MY (2011) Treeline form—a potential key to understanding treeline dynamics. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 20:582–596.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00622.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ibáñez I, Zak DR, Burton AJ, Pregitzer KS (2018) Anthropogenic nitrogen deposition ameliorates the decline in tree growth caused by a drier climate. Ecology 99:411–420.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2095 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jochner M, Bugmann H, Nötzli M, Bigler C (2017) Among-tree variability and feedback effects result in different growth responses to climate change at the upper treeline in the Swiss Alps. Ecol Evol 7:7937–7953.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3290 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jump AS, Hunt JM, Peñuelas J (2006) Rapid climate change-related growth decline at the southern range edge of Fagus sylvatica. Glob Change Biol 12:2163–2174.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01250.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. King DA (1990) The adaptive significance of tree height. Am Nat 135:809–828.  https://doi.org/10.1086/285075 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Knohl A, Schulze E-D, Kolle O, Buchmann N (2003) Large carbon uptake by an unmanaged 250-year-old deciduous forest in Central Germany. Agric For Meteorol 118:151–167.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(03)00115-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Koch GW, Sillett SC, Jennings GM, Davis SD (2004) The limits to tree height. Nature 428:851–854.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02417 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Konter O, Büntgen U, Carrer M et al (2016) Climate signal age effects in boreal tree-rings: lessons to be learned for paleoclimatic reconstructions. Quat Sci Rev 142:164–172.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2016.04.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Körner C (2012) Alpine treelines: functional ecology of the global high elevation tree limits. Springer, BaselCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Linares JC, Taïqui L, Sangüesa-Barreda G et al (2013) Age-related drought sensitivity of Atlas cedar (Cedrus atlantica) in the Moroccan Middle Atlas forests. Dendrochronologia 31:88–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2012.08.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Luis MD, Novak K, Čufar K, Raventós J (2009) Size mediated climate–growth relationships in Pinus halepensis and Pinus pinea. Trees 23:1065–1073.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-009-0349-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Luyssaert S, Schulze E-D, Börner A et al (2008) Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature 455:213–215.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07276 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mencuccini M, Martínez-Vilalta J, Vanderklein D et al (2005) Size-mediated ageing reduces vigour in trees. Ecol Lett 8:1183–1190.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00819.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mencuccini M, Hölttä T, Petit G, Magnani F (2007) Sanio’s laws revisited. Size-dependent changes in the xylem architecture of trees. Ecol Lett 10:1084–1093.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01104.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mérian P, Lebourgeois F (2011) Size-mediated climate–growth relationships in temperate forests: a multi-species analysis. For Ecol Manag 261:1382–1391.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2011.01.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nicolussi K, Bortenschlager S, Körner C (1995) Increase in tree-ring width in subalpine Pinus cembra from the central Alps that may be CO2 related. Trees 9:181–189.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00195270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peters RL, Groenendijk P, Vlam M, Zuidema PA (2015) Detecting long-term growth trends using tree rings: a critical evaluation of methods. Glob Change Biol 21:2040–2054.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12826 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Petit G, Anfodillo T, Carraro V et al (2011) Hydraulic constraints limit height growth in trees at high altitude. New Phytol 189:241–252.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03455.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Piutti E, Cescatti A (1997) A quantitative analysis of the interactions between climatic response and intraspecific competition in European beech. Can J For Res 27:277–284.  https://doi.org/10.1139/x96-176 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Price DT, Cooke BJ, Metsaranta JM, Kurz WA (2015) If forest dynamics in Canada’s west are driven mainly by competition, why did they change? Half-century evidence says: climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112:E4340–E4340.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1508245112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. R Core Team (2015) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  47. Rathgeber CBK, Rossi S, Bontemps J-D (2011) Cambial activity related to tree size in a mature silver-fir plantation. Ann Bot 108:429–438.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcr168 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rossi S, Anfodillo T, Menardi R (2006) Trephor: a New tool for sampling microcores from tree stems. IAWA J 27:89–97.  https://doi.org/10.1163/22941932-90000139 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rossi S, Deslauriers A, Griçar J et al (2008) Critical temperatures for xylogenesis in conifers of cold climates. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 17:696–707.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2008.00417.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rozas V, DeSoto L, Olano JM (2009) Sex-specific, age-dependent sensitivity of tree-ring growth to climate in the dioecious tree Juniperus thurifera. New Phytol 182:687–697.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02770.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ryan MG, Yoder BJ (1997) Hydraulic limits to tree height and tree growth. Bioscience 47:235–242.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1313077 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ryan MG, Phillips N, Bond BJ (2006) The hydraulic limitation hypothesis revisited. Plant Cell Environ 29:367–381.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2005.01478.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sanio K (1872) Uber die Grosse der Holzzellen bei der gemeinen Kiefer (Pinus silvestris). Jb Wiss Bot 8:401–420Google Scholar
  54. SNAP (2016) Scenarios network for Alaska and arctic planning. http://ckan.snap.uaf.edu/dataset. Accessed 28 July 2016
  55. Sullivan PF, Pattison RR, Brownlee AH et al (2017) Limited evidence of declining growth among moisture-limited black and white spruce in interior Alaska. Sci Rep 7:15344.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15644-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thomas H (2002) Ageing in plants. Mech Ageing Dev 123:747–753.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-6374(01)00420-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Vaganov EA, Hughes MK, Shashkin AV (2006) Growth dynamics of conifer tree rings: images of past and future environments. Springer, Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  58. Vicente-Serrano SM, Beguería S, López-Moreno JI (2009) A multiscalar drought index sensitive to global warming: the standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index. J Clim 23:1696–1718.  https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2909.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Vieira J, Campelo F, Nabais C (2009) Age-dependent responses of tree-ring growth and intra-annual density fluctuations of Pinus pinaster to Mediterranean climate. Trees 23:257–265.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-008-0273-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. von Arx G, Carrer M (2014) ROXAS—a new tool to build centuries-long tracheid-lumen chronologies in conifers. Dendrochronologia 32:290–293.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2013.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wang Y, Pederson N, Ellison AM et al (2016) Increased stem density and competition may diminish the positive effects of warming at alpine treeline. Ecology 97:1668–1679.  https://doi.org/10.1890/15-1264.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Williams AP, Xu C, McDowell NG (2011) Who is the new sheriff in town regulating boreal forest growth? Environ Res Lett 6:041004.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/041004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wilmking M, Buras A, Eusemann P et al (2017a) High frequency growth variability of White spruce clones does not differ from non-clonal trees at Alaskan treelines. Dendrochronologia 44:187–192.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2017.05.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wilmking M, Scharnweber T, van der Maaten-Theunissen M, van der Maaten E (2017b) Reconciling the community with a concept—the uniformitarian principle in the dendro-sciences. Dendrochronologia 44:211–214.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2017.06.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Yu G, Liu Y, Wang X, Ma K (2008) Age-dependent tree-ring growth responses to climate in Qilian juniper (Sabina przewalskii). Trees 22:197–204.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-007-0170-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zeng Q, Rossi S, Yang B (2018) Effects of age and size on xylem phenology in two conifers of Northwestern China. Front Plant Sci.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.02264 Google Scholar
  67. Zhang J, Huang S, He F (2015) Half-century evidence from Western Canada shows forest dynamics are primarily driven by competition followed by climate. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112:4009–4014.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1420844112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Landscape Ecology and Ecosystem Dynamics Working Group, Institute of Botany and Landscape EcologyUniversity of GreifswaldGreifswaldGermany
  2. 2.Forest Growth and Woody Biomass ProductionTU DresdenDresdenGermany
  3. 3.General and Special Botany Working Group, Institute of Botany and Landscape EcologyUniversity of GreifswaldGreifswaldGermany

Personalised recommendations