Climate Dynamics

, Volume 38, Issue 7–8, pp 1359–1373 | Cite as

Evaluating observed and projected future climate changes for the Arctic using the Köppen-Trewartha climate classification

  • Song Feng
  • Chang-Hoi Ho
  • Qi Hu
  • Robert J. Oglesby
  • Su-Jong Jeong
  • Baek-Min Kim
Article

Abstract

The ecosystems in the Arctic region are known to be very sensitive to climate changes. The accelerated warming for the past several decades has profoundly influenced the lives of the native populations and ecosystems in the Arctic. Given that the Köppen-Trewartha (K-T) climate classification is based on reliable variations of land-surface types (especially vegetation), this study used the K-T scheme to evaluate climate changes and their impact on vegetation for the Arctic (north of 50°N) by analyzing observations as well as model simulations for the period 1900–2099. The models include 16 fully coupled global climate models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment. By the end of this century, the annual-mean surface temperature averaged over Arctic land regions is projected to increase by 3.1, 4.6 and 5.3°C under the Special Report on Emissions Scenario (SRES) B1, A1b, and A2 emission scenarios, respectively. Increasing temperature favors a northward expansion of temperate climate (i.e., Dc and Do in the K-T classification) and boreal oceanic climate (i.e., Eo) types into areas previously covered by boreal continental climate (i.e., Ec) and tundra; and tundra into areas occupied by permanent ice. The tundra region is projected to shrink by −1.86 × 106 km2 (−33.0%) in B1, −2.4 × 106 km2 (−42.6%) in A1b, and −2.5 × 106 km2 (−44.2%) in A2 scenarios by the end of this century. The Ec climate type retreats at least 5° poleward of its present location, resulting in −18.9, −30.2, and −37.1% declines in areal coverage under the B1, A1b and A2 scenarios, respectively. The temperate climate types (Dc and Do) advance and take over the area previously covered by Ec. The area covered by Dc climate expands by 4.61 × 106 km2 (84.6%) in B1, 6.88 × 106 km2 (126.4%) in A1b, and 8.16 × 106 km2 (149.6%) in A2 scenarios. The projected redistributions of K-T climate types also differ regionally. In northern Europe and Alaska, the warming may cause more rapid expansion of temperate climate types. Overall, the climate types in 25, 39.1, and 45% of the entire Arctic region are projected to change by the end of this century under the B1, A1b, and A2 scenarios, respectively. Because the K-T climate classification was constructed on the basis of vegetation types, and each K-T climate type is closely associated with certain prevalent vegetation species, the projected large shift in climate types suggests extensive broad-scale redistribution of prevalent ecoregions in the Arctic.

Keywords

Arctic Köppen-Trewartha climate classification Fully coupled global climate models Climate projection Vegetation 

References

  1. Adam JC, Lettenmaier DP (2003) Adjustment of global gridded precipitation for systematic bias. J Geophys Res 108:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angert A, Biraud S, Bonfils C, Henning CC, Buermann W, Pinzon J, Tucker CJ, Fung I (2005) Drier summer cancel out the CO2 uptake enhancement induced by warmer springs. Proc Natl Acad Sci 102:10823–10827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA) (2004) Impacts of a warming arctic: arctic climate impact assessment. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA) (2005) Arctic climate impact assessment: scientific report. Cambridge Univ. Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Arft AM et al (1999) Responses of tundra plants to experimental warming: meta-analysis of the international tundra experiment. Ecol Monogr 69:491–511Google Scholar
  6. Bailey RG (2009) Ecosystem geography: from ecoregions to sites, 2nd edn. Springer, New York, p 251Google Scholar
  7. Baker B, Diaz H, Hargrove W, Hoffman F (2010) Use of the Köppen-Trewartha climate classification to evaluate climatic refugia in statistically derived ecoregions for the People’s Republic of China. Climatic Change 98:113–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barber VA, Juday GP, Finney BP (2000) Reduced growth of Alaskan white spruce in the twentieth century from temperature-induced drought stress. Nature 405:668–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bhatt US et al (2010) Circumpolar Arctic tundra vegetation change is linked to sea ice decline. Earth Interact 14(8):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bonan GB, Pollard D, Thompson SL (1992) Effects of boreal forest vegetation on global climate. Nature 359:716–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bunn AG, Goetz SJ, Kimball JS, Zhang K (2007) Northern high‐latitude ecosystems respond to climate change. Eos Trans AGU 88:333–335. doi:10.1029/2007EO340001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Callaghan TV et al. (2005) Arctic tundra and polar desert ecosystems. In: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ed) Arctic climate impact assessment: scientific report. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, pp 243–352Google Scholar
  13. Chapin FS III et al (2005) Role of land-surface changes in Arctic summer warming. Science 310:657–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Claussen M, Kubatzki C, Brovkin V, Ganopolski A, Hoelzmann P, Pachur H (1999) Simulation of an abrupt change in Sharan vegetation in the mid-Holocene. Geophys Res Lett 26:2037–2040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cole KL (2010) Vegetation response to early Holocene warming as an analogy for current and future changes. Conserv Biol 24:29–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Castro M, Gallardo C, Jylha K, Tuomenvirta H (2007) The use of climate-type classification for assessing climate change effects in Europe from an ensemble of nine regional climate models. Climatic Change 81:329–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dima H, Lohmann G (2007) A hemispheric mechanism for the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. J Climate 20:2706–2719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Engstrom R, Hope A, Kwon H, Harazono Y, Mano M, Oechel W (2006) Modeling evapotranspiration in Arctic coastal plain ecosystems using a modified BIOME-BGC model. J Geophys Res 111:G02021. doi:10.1029/2005JG000102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Epstein HE, Walker MD, Chapin FS III, Starfield AM (2000) A transient, nutrient-based model of arctic plant community response to climatic warming. Ecol Appl 10:824–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Epstein HE, Kaplan JO, Lischke H, Yu Q (2007) Simulating future changes in arctic and sub-arctic vegetation. Comput Sci Eng 9(4):12–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Euskirchen ES, McGuire AD, Chapin FS III, Yi S, Thompson CC (2009) Changes in vegetation in northern Alaska under scenarios of climate change 2003–2100: implications for climate feedbacks. Ecol Appl 19:1022–1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Foley JA, Kutzbach JE, Coe MT, Levis S (1994) Feedbacks between climate and boreal forests during the Holocene epoch. Nature 371:52–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fraedrich K, Gerstengarbe F-W, Werner PC (2001) Climate shifts during the last century. Climatic Change 50:405–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gerstengarbe F-W, Werner PC (2009) A short update on Koeppen climate shifts in Europe between 1901 and 2003. Climatic Change 92:99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gillett NP, Stone DA, Stott PA, Nozawa T, Karpechko AY, Hegerl GC, Wehner MF, Jones PD (2008) Attribution of polar warming to human influence. Nat Geosci 1:750–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gleckler PJ, Taylor KE, Doutriaux C (2008) Performance metrics for climate models. J Geophys Res. doi:10.1029/2007JD008972
  27. Goetz SJ, Bunn AG, Fiske GJ, Houghton RA (2005) Satellite-observed photosynthetic trends across boreal North America associated with climate and fire disturbance. Proc Natl Acad Sci 102:13521–13525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hinzman LD et al (2005) Evidence and implications of recent climate change in Northern Alaska and other Arctic regions. Climatic Change 72:251–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hobbie SE, Nadelhoffer KJ, Högberg P (2002) A synthesis: the role of nutrients as constraints on carbon balances in boreal Arctic regions. Plant Soil 242:163–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 996Google Scholar
  31. Jeong S-J, Ho C-H, Park T-W, Kim J, Levis S (2010a) Impact of vegetation feedback on the temperature and its diurnal range over the Northern Hemisphere during summer in a 2 × CO2 climate. Clim Dyn. doi:10.1007/s00382-010-0827-x
  32. Jeong S-J, Ho C-H, Kim B-M, Feng S, Medvigy D, Kim Y-W, Lee H-H (2010b) Conspicuous circumpolar greening in the end of growing season over the Arctic region. J Geophys Res (submitted)Google Scholar
  33. Jia GJ, Epstein HE, Walker DA (2009) Vegetation greening in the Canadian arctic related to decadal warming. J Environ Monit 11:2231–2238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kaplan JO, New M (2006) Arctic climate change with a 2°C global warming: timing, climate patterns, and vegetation change. Climatic Change 79:213–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Köppen W (1936) Das geographisca system der Klimate. In: Köppen W, Geiger G (eds) Handbuch der Klimatologie. 1. C. Gebr, Borntraeger, pp 1–44Google Scholar
  36. Lenihan JM, Neilson RP (1995) Canadian vegetation sensitivity to projected climatic change at three organizational levels. Climatic Change 30:27–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Levis S, Foley JA, Pollard D (1999) Potential high-latitude vegetation feedbacks on CO2-induced climate change. Geophys Res Lett 26:747–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Levis S, Bonan GB, Vertenstein M, Oleson KW (2004) The community land model’s dynamic global vegetation model (CLM-DGVM): technical description and user’s guide. Technical Note NCAR/TN-459 + IA, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, p 50Google Scholar
  39. Lischke K, Bolliger J, Seppelt R (2007) Dynamic spatio-temporal landscape models. In: Kienast F et al (eds) A Changing world: challenges for landscape research. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 273–296Google Scholar
  40. Lloyd AH (2005) Ecological histories, ecological futures: what recent changes at treeline reveal about the future. Ecology 86:1687–1695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lloyd AH, Rupp TS, Fastie CL, Starfield AM (2003) Patterns and dynamics of treeline advance on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska. J Geophys Res 108:8150. doi:10.1029/2001JD000570 Google Scholar
  42. Matthes H, Rinke A, Dethloff K (2009) Variability of observed temperature-derived climate indices in the Arctic. Global Planet Change 69:214–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maurer EP, Adam JC, Wood AW (2009) Climate model based consensus on the hydrologic impacts of climate change to the Rio Lempa basin of Central America. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 13:183–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McGuire AD, Clein JS, Melillo JM, Kicklighter DW, Meier RA, Vorosmarty CJ, Serreze MC (2000) Modelling carbon responses of tundra ecosystems to historical and projected climate: sensitivity of pan-Arctic carbon storage to temporal and spatial variation in climate. Global Change Biol 6(supplementary):141–159Google Scholar
  45. McGuire AD, Chapin FS III, Walsh JE, Wirth C (2006) Integrated regional changes in arctic climate feedbacks: implications for the global climate system. Annu Rev Environ Resour 31:61–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Meehl GA, Covey C, Delworth T, Latif M, McAvaney B, Mitchell JFB, Stouffer RJ, Taylor KE (2007) The WCRP CMIP3 multi-model dataset: a new era in climate change research. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 88:1383–1394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Min S-K, Zhang X, Zwiers F (2008) Human-induced Arctic moistening. Science 320:518–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Nakićenović N, Swart R (2000) Special report on emission scenarios. A special report of working group III of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  49. Peterson BJ et al (2002) Increasing river discharge to the Arctic Ocean. Science 298:2171–2173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Piao S, Friedlingstein P, Ciais P, Viovy N, Demarty J (2007) Growing season extension and its impact on terrestrial carbon cycle in the Northern Hemisphere over the past 2 decades. Global Biogeochem Cycles 21:GB3018. doi:10.1029/2006GB002888
  51. Pierce DW, Barnett TP, Santer BD, Gleckler PJ (2009) Selecting global climate models for regional climate change studies. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:8441–8446Google Scholar
  52. Post E et al (2009) Ecological dynamics across the Arctic associated with recent climate change. Science 325:1355–1358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Reichler T, Kim J (2008) How well do coupled models simulate today’s climate? Bull Am Meteor Soc 89:303–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rupp TS, Chapin FS III, Starfield AM (2000) Response of subarctic vegetation to transient climatic change on the Seward Peninsula in North-West Alaska. Global Change Biol 6:541–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Serreze MC, Holland MM, Stroeve J (2007) Perspectives on the Arctic’s shrinking sea-ice cover. Science 315:1533–1536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sitch S, Smith B, Prentice IC, Arneth A, Bondeau A, Cramer W, Kaplan JO, Levis S, Lucht W, Sykes MT, Thonicke K, Venevsky S (2003) Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ dynamic global vegetation model. Glob Change Biol 9:161–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Soja AJ, Tchebakova NM, French NHF, Flannigan MD, Shugart HH, Stocks BJ, Sukhinin AI, Parfenova EI, Chapin III FS (2007) Climate-induced boreal forest change: predictions versus current observations, Global Planet. Change 56:274–296Google Scholar
  58. Stone RS, Dutton EG, Harris JM, Longenecker D (2002) Earlier spring snowmelt in northern Alaska as an indicator of climate change. J Geophys Res 107:D10, 4089. doi:10.1029/2000JD000286
  59. Sturm M, Racine C, Tape K (2001) Increasing shrub abundance in the Arctic. Nature 411:546–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tchebakova NM, Parfenova E, Soja AJ (2009) The effect of climate, permafrost and fire on vegetation change in Siberia in a changing climate. Environ Res Lett 4. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/045013
  61. Thompson CC, McGuire AD, Clein JS, Chapin FS III, Beringer J (2005) Net carbon exchange across the Arctic tundra-boreal forest transition in Alaska 1981–2000. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 11:805–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Thorpe N, Eyegetok N, Hakongak N, Elders K (2002) The earth is faster now: indigenous observations of arctic environmental change. In: Krupnik I, Jolly D (eds) Research Consortium of the United States, Fairbanks, AK, pp 201–239Google Scholar
  63. Trewartha GT, Horn LH (1980) An introduction to climate, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 437Google Scholar
  64. Tucker C, Slayback D, Pinzon J, Los S, Myneni R, Taylor M (2001) Higher northern latitude NDVI, growing season trends from 1982 to 1999. Int J Biometeorol 45:184–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wang M, Overland JE (2004) Detecting Arctic climate change using Köppen climate classification. Climatic Change 67:43–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Willmott CJ, Rowe CM, Philpot WD (1985) Small-scale climate maps: a sensitivity analysis of some common assumptions associated with grid-point interpolation and contouring. Am Cartogr 12:5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wood AW, Leung LR, Sridhar V, Lettenmaier DP (2004) Hydrologic implications of dynamical and statistical approaches to downscaling climate model outputs. Climatic Change 62:189–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Woodward FI, Lomas MR (2004) Vegetation dynamics–simulating responses to climatic change. Biol Rev 79:643–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zhang T, Frauenfeld OW, Serreze MC, Etringer AJ, Oelke C, McCreight JL, Barry RG, Gilichinsky D, Yang D, Ye H, Feng L, Chudinova S (2005) Spatial and temporal variability in active layer thickness over the Russian Arctic drainage basin. J Geophys Res 110. doi:10.1029/2004JD005642
  70. Zhou LM, Tucker CJ, Kaufmann RK, Slayback D, Shabanov NV, Myneni RB (2001) Variations in northern vegetation activity inferred from satellite data of vegetation index during 1981 to 1999. J Geophys Res 106:20,069–20,083Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Song Feng
    • 1
  • Chang-Hoi Ho
    • 2
  • Qi Hu
    • 1
    • 3
  • Robert J. Oglesby
    • 1
    • 3
  • Su-Jong Jeong
    • 2
  • Baek-Min Kim
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Natural ResourcesUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA
  2. 2.School of Earth and Environmental SciencesSeoul National UniversitySeoulKorea
  3. 3.Department of Earth and Atmospheric SciencesUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA
  4. 4.Korean Polar Research InstituteIncheonKorea

Personalised recommendations