Advertisement

Prediction of Vertical and Horizontal Distribution of Vegetation Due to Climate Change in the Eastern Mediterranean Region of Turkey

  • Junji SanoEmail author
  • Shigenobu Tamai
  • Makoto Ando
  • Kemal Tulühan Yılmaz
Chapter
Part of the The Anthropocene: Politik—Economics—Society—Science book series (APESS, volume 18)

Abstract

Climate change affects land use patterns all over the world. This study describes the present condition of vegetation in the Seyhan and Ceyhan basins, in the Eastern Mediterranean Region of Turkey, to estimate the impacts of climate change on the species composition and vegetation productivity. There is a great variety of forests ranging from evergreen coniferous forests to deciduous broad-leaved trees along an altitudinal gradient. There are single-species forests of both evergreens and deciduous forests, and also mixed forest formations. The most frequently occurring evergreen forest consists of Pinus brutia. Other needle-leaf forest trees are Pinus halepensis in the coastal regions, and Abies cilicia and Cedrus libani in the higher parts of mountains. The most commonly occurring deciduous forest trees are comprised of various Quercus species, such as Q. infectoria and Q. cerris, which are widespread in this region. The other common trees in the mid-altitude and lower mixed and broad-leaved forests are Carpinus, Fraxinus, Styrax and some maquis species, such as Arbutus andrachne and Quercus coccifera. However, anthropogenic (man-made) destruction has greatly reduced their importance in this region. We estimated that the vegetation would be strongly impacted by global warming and a drier climate in the future, based on the data produced by the climate group of ICCAP (Kimura et al. 2007). The contemporary and 2070s biomass and productivity of this area were estimated from satellite images and field research. The present vegetation was remarkably changed from the potential by anthropogenic pressure, especially at the lower level elevations. Furthermore, recent climate changes were discovered to have had a powerful effect on the evergreen coniferous forests. All vegetation types are predicted to shift from their present distribution areas to northern or higher altitudes, the consequence being that the distribution of the steppe areas will increase and in turn the evergreen coniferous forests will decrease. The biomass distribution in this area will decrease, compared with that in the present, but net primary production will increase by the 2070s. In conclusion, the natural forests should be conserved and reforestation enhanced to mitigate the climate change of the future.

Keywords

Anthropogenic impact Biomass Deciduous broad-leaved forest Evergreen forest Global warming Present and potential vegetation Productivity Steppe Succession 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors sincerely thank Prof. Dr. Tsugihiro Watanabe (the leader of the ICCAP: the Research Project on the Impact of Climate Changes on Agricultural Production Systems in Arid Areas) and Prof. Dr. Rıza Kanber (the coordinator of the Turkish Team of the ICCAP) for their great efforts in organising and completing the ICCAP Project; Drs. Türker Altan and Mustafa Artar at the Çukurova University; Drs. Ekrem Aktoklu, Mustafa Atmaca and Kayhan Kaplan at the Mustafa Kemal University; Dr. Meryem Atik at the Akdeniz University; Mr. Ramazan Gökdemiroğlu at the Forest Office in Aladağ; and many people in Turkey for their arrangements and help with our field research and useful discussions. We also greatly thank Dr. Hakan Alphan and Yüksel İzcankurtaran for their help with our preliminary research; Drs. Takanori Nagano, Yoichi Fujihara, Ms. Noriko Sasaki, and many of the staff of RIHN, Dr. Fujio Kimura at Tsukuba University and Dr. Kenji Tanaka at Kyoto University, and all ICCAP members for their great help and support with our research, and Tottori University students, Mr. Keisuke Kato and Ms. Yuki Kishibe for their data analysis, especially of the land-use pattern using Landsat images and the potential vegetation patterns in the present and the future. We are deeply grateful to Prof. Dr. Mehmet Aydın at Mustafa Kemal University and Prof. Dr. Selim Kapur at Çukurova University for their insightful comments and useful suggestions on our manuscript. We had many valuable and precious experiences during the study of the vegetation and climate change in Turkey. Therefore, we gratefully appreciate all of them once again. Finally we thank the editors and reviewers of this book, and Prof. Dr. Marc D. Abrams at the Pennsylvania State University, who made informative comments and corrections.

References

  1. Abrams MD (1990) Adaptations and responses to drought in Quercus species of North America. Tree Physiology 7(1–4):227–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen CD, Macalady AK, Chenchouni H, Bachelet D, McDowell N, Vennetier M, Kitzberger T, Rigling A, Breshears DD, (Ted) Hogg EH, Gonzalez P, Fensham R, Zhang Z, Castro J, Demidova N, Lim JH, Allard G, Running SW, Semerci A, Cobb N (2010) A global overview of drought and heat-induce tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. Forest Ecology and Management 259:660–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Altan T (2000) Natural Vegetation. University of Çukurova, Agricultural Faculty Publication: 235, A-76.Google Scholar
  4. Atik M, Tamai S, Altan T, Ando M, Sano J, Atmaca M, Aktoklu E, Kaplan K, Artar M, Guzelmansur A, Cincinoglu A, Buyukasik Y (2007) Possible scenario for the vegetation change in Seyhan river basin and role of land uses “anthropogenic pressures”. The Final Report of ICCAP (Impact of Climate Changes on Agricultural Production System in Arid Areas), Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto, Japan, pp 111–118.Google Scholar
  5. Bachelet D, Neilson RP, Lenihan JM, Drapek RJ (2001) Climate change effects on vegetation distribution and carbon budget in the United States. Ecosystems 4:164–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baytop T (1994) A Dictionary of Vernacular Names of Wild Plants of Turkey. Turkish History Institution Pub, Ankara.Google Scholar
  7. Berberoğlu S, Dönmez C, Evrendilek F (2015) Coupling of remote sensing, field campaign, and mechanistic and empirical modelling to monitor spatiotemporal carbon dynamics of a Mediterranean watershed in a changing regional climate. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 187:179.Google Scholar
  8. Cannel MGR (1982) World Forest Biomass and Primary Production Data. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  9. Dönmez C, Berberoğlu S, Curran PJ (2011) Modelling the current and future spatial distribution of NPP in a Mediterranean watershed. International Journal of Applied Earth Observations 13:336–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Evrendilek F, Wali MK (2004) Changing global climate: historical carbon and nitrogen budgets and projected responses of Ohio’s Cropland ecosystems. Ecosystems 7:381–392.Google Scholar
  11. Henne PD, Elkin C, Franke J, Colombaroli D, Calo C, La Mantia T, Pasta S, Conedera M, Dermody O, Tinner W (2015) Reviving extinct Mediterranean forest communities may improve ecosystem potential in a warmer future. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 13:356–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. IPCC (2013) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. In Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner GK, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds) Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  13. Kılıç S, Evrendilek F, Berberoğlu A, Demirkesen C (2006) Environmental monitoring of land-use and land-cover changes in a Mediterranean region of Turkey. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 114:157–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kimura F, Kitoh A, Sumi A, Asanuma J, Yatagai A (2007) Downscaling of the global warming projections to Turkey. The Final Report of ICCAP (Impact of Climate Changes on Agricultural Production System in Arid Areas), Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto, Japan, pp 21–32.Google Scholar
  15. Kira T (1976) Terrestrial Ecosystems – A General Description. Kyoritsu, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  16. Kramer K, Leinonen I, Loustau D (2000) The importance of phenology for the evaluation of impact of climate change on growth of boreal, temperate and Mediterranean forests ecosystems: an overview. International Journal of Biometeorology 44:67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Matthews HD, Weaver AJ, Meissner KJ, Gillett NP, Eby M (2004) Natural and anthropogenic climate change: incorporating historical land cover change, vegetation dynamics and the global carbon cycle. Climate Dynamics 22:461–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Osborne CP, Mitchell PL, Sheehy JE, Woodward FI (2000) Modelling the recent historical impacts of atmospheric CO2 and climate change on Mediterranean vegetation. Global Change Biology 6:445–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Polunin O, Huxley A (1990) Flowers of the Mediterranean, 3rd ed. London, Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
  20. Roda F, Retana J, Gracia CA, Bellot J (1999) Ecology of Mediterranean Evergreen Oak Forests. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  21. Sabate S, Gracia CA, Sanchez A (2002) Likely effects of climate change on growth of Quercus ilex, Pinus halepensis, Pinus pinaster, Pinus sylvestris and Fagus sylvatica forests in the Mediterranean region. Forest Ecology and Management 162:23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Thornthwaite CW (1931) The climates of North America – according to a new classification. Geography Review 21:633–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Thornthwaite CW (1948) An approach toward a rational classification of climate. Geography Review 38:55–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vera FWM (2000) Grazing Ecology and Forest History, p 506, CABI Publishing, Wallingford, New York.Google Scholar
  25. Yamamoto K (2000) Estimation of the canopy gap size using two photographs at different heights. Ecological Research 15:203–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yılmaz KT (1993) A Research on the Anthropogenic Impacts of Some Upland Settlements on Natural Vegetation in Dörtyol District of the Amanos Mountains. Ph.D. thesis, University of Çukurova, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Landscape Architecture, Adana.Google Scholar
  27. Yılmaz KT (1998) Ecological diversity of the Eastern Mediterranean region of Turkey and its conservation. Biodiversity Conservation 7:87–96.Google Scholar
  28. Yılmaz KT (2001) Mediterranean Vegetation. University of Çukurova, Agricultural Faculty Publication No: 141, B-13.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Junji Sano
    • 1
    Email author
  • Shigenobu Tamai
    • 2
  • Makoto Ando
    • 3
  • Kemal Tulühan Yılmaz
    • 4
  1. 1.Forest Ecology and Ecosystem Management Laboratory, Faculty of AgricultureTottori UniversityTottoriJapan
  2. 2.Arid Land Research CenterTottori UniversityTottoriJapan
  3. 3.Field Science Education and Research CenterKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  4. 4.Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of AgricultureÇukurova UniversityAdanaTurkey

Personalised recommendations