• Energy Research

Abstract Woody species' requirements and environmental sensitivity change from seedlings to adults, a process referred to as ontogenetic shift. Such shifts can be increased by climate change. To assess the changes in the difference of temperature experienced by seedlings and adults in the context of climate change, it is essential to have reliable climatic data over long periods that capture the thermal conditions experienced by the individuals throughout their life cycle. Here we used a unique cross‐European database of 2,195 pairs of resurveyed forest plots with a mean intercensus time interval of 37 years. We inferred macroclimatic temperature (free‐air conditions above tree canopies—representative of the conditions experienced by adult trees) and microclimatic temperature (representative of the juvenile stage at the forest floor, inferred from the relationship between canopy cover, distance to the coast and below‐canopy temperature) at both surveys. We then address the long‐term, large‐scale and multitaxa dynamics of the difference between the temperatures experienced by adults and juveniles of 25 temperate tree species. We found significant, but species‐specific, variations in the perceived temperature (calculated from presence/absence data) between life stages during both surveys. Additionally, the difference of the temperature experienced by the adult versus juveniles significantly increased between surveys for 8 of 25 species. We found evidence of a relationship between the difference of temperature experienced by juveniles and adults over time and one key functional trait (i.e. leaf area). Together, these results suggest that the temperatures experienced by adults versus juveniles became more decoupled over time for a subset of species, probably due to the combination of climate change and a recorded increase of canopy cover between the surveys resulting in higher rates of macroclimate than microclimate warming. Synthesis. We document warming and canopy‐cover induced changes in the difference of the temperature experienced by juveniles and adults. These findings have implications for forest management adaptation to climate change such as the promotion of tree regeneration by creating suitable species‐specific microclimatic conditions. Such adaptive management will help to mitigate the macroclimate change in the understorey layer.

Species distribution models (SDMs) are widely used to hindcast or forecast suitable habitat conditions during climate change. Although distant populations of a given species may show local adaptations to diverging environmental conditions, traditional SDMs disregard intraspecific variation. Yet, incorporating genetic information into SDMs could improve predictions. Here we aimed at investigating whether genetically informed SDMs would outperform traditional SDMs. Using published information on the spatial genetic structure of the European Beech Fagus sylvatica L. (1753), we built lineage-specific SDMs for each phylogenetic group of the species. We then combined all lineage-specific SDMs into a single genetically informed SDM that we compared against a traditional SDM approach. We finally compared SDMs’ predictions against independent datasets of present-day distribution as well as fossil distribution data from the Mid-Holocene, using six metrics of model performance. We found that aggregating lineage-specific SDMs into a single genetically informed SDM increased model performances to identify suitable areas currently occupied by F. sylvatica. In comparison to a traditional SDM, the genetically informed SDM we built for F. sylvatica assigned higher probabilities of occurrence during the Mid-Holocene at locations where fossil records were found. Aggregating lineage-specific SDMs into a single genetically informed SDM seems to outperform the traditional SDM approach, especially so when the aim is to identify potentially suitable areas of occupancy. This could be particularly useful for the identification of cryptic refugia that remain undetected by traditional SDMs. Genetically informed SDMs have the potential to improve our understanding of species redistribution under climate change.

Summary Global change has accelerated local species extinctions and colonizations, often resulting in losses and gains of evolutionary lineages with unique features. Do these losses and gains occur randomly across the phylogeny? We quantified: temporal changes in plant phylogenetic diversity (PD); and the phylogenetic relatedness (PR) of lost and gained species in 2672 semi‐permanent vegetation plots in European temperate forest understories resurveyed over an average period of 40 yr. Controlling for differences in species richness, PD increased slightly over time and across plots. Moreover, lost species within plots exhibited a higher degree of PR than gained species. This implies that gained species originated from a more diverse set of evolutionary lineages than lost species. Certain lineages also lost and gained more species than expected by chance, with Ericaceae, Fabaceae, and Orchidaceae experiencing losses and Amaranthaceae, Cyperaceae, and Rosaceae showing gains. Species losses and gains displayed no significant phylogenetic signal in response to changes in macroclimatic conditions and nitrogen deposition. As anthropogenic global change intensifies, temperate forest understories experience losses and gains in specific phylogenetic branches and ecological strategies, while the overall mean PD remains relatively stable.

Climate change is commonly assumed to induce species’ range shifts toward the poles. Yet, other environmental changes may affect the geographical distribution of species in unexpected ways. Here, we quantify multidecadal shifts in the distribution of European forest plants and link these shifts to key drivers of forest biodiversity change: climate change, atmospheric deposition (nitrogen and sulfur), and forest canopy dynamics. Surprisingly, westward distribution shifts were 2.6 times more likely than northward ones. Not climate change, but nitrogen-mediated colonization events, possibly facilitated by the recovery from past acidifying deposition, best explain westward movements. Biodiversity redistribution patterns appear complex and are more likely driven by the interplay among several environmental changes than due to the exclusive effects of climate change alone.

AbstractRapid climatic changes and increasing human influence at high elevations around the world will have profound impacts on mountain biodiversity. However, forecasts from statistical models (e.g. species distribution models) rarely consider that plant community changes could substantially lag behind climatic changes, hindering our ability to make temporally realistic projections for the coming century. Indeed, the magnitudes of lags, and the relative importance of the different factors giving rise to them, remain poorly understood. We review evidence for three types of lag: “dispersal lags” affecting plant species’ spread along elevational gradients, “establishment lags” following their arrival in recipient communities, and “extinction lags” of resident species. Variation in lags is explained by variation among species in physiological and demographic responses, by effects of altered biotic interactions, and by aspects of the physical environment. Of these, altered biotic interactions could contribute substantially to establishment and extinction lags, yet impacts of biotic interactions on range dynamics are poorly understood. We develop a mechanistic community model to illustrate how species turnover in future communities might lag behind simple expectations based on species’ range shifts with unlimited dispersal. The model shows a combined contribution of altered biotic interactions and dispersal lags to plant community turnover along an elevational gradient following climate warming. Our review and simulation support the view that accounting for disequilibrium range dynamics will be essential for realistic forecasts of patterns of biodiversity under climate change, with implications for the conservation of mountain species and the ecosystem functions they provide.

Brief introduction: What are microclimates and why are they important?Microclimate science has developed into a global discipline. Microclimate science is increasingly used to understand and mitigate climate and biodiversity shifts. Here, we provide an overview of the current status of microclimate ecology and biogeography in terrestrial ecosystems, and where this field is heading next.Microclimate investigations in ecology and biogeography: We highlight the latest research on interactions between microclimates and organisms, including how microclimates influence individuals, and through them populations, communities and entire ecosystems and their processes. We also briefly discuss recent research on how organisms shape microclimates from the tropics to the poles.Microclimate applications in ecosystem management: Microclimates are also important in ecosystem management under climate change. We showcase new research in microclimate management with examples from biodiversity conservation, forestry and urban ecology. We discuss the importance of microrefugia in conservation and how to promote microclimate heterogeneity.Methods for microclimate science: We showcase the recent advances in data acquisition, such as novel field sensors and remote sensing methods. We discuss microclimate modelling, mapping and data processing, including accessibility of modelling tools, advantages of mechanistic and statistical modelling and solutions for computational challenges that have pushed the state-of-the-art of the field.What's next?We identify major knowledge gaps that need to be filled for further advancing microclimate investigations, applications and methods. These gaps include spatiotemporal scaling of microclimate data, mismatches between macroclimate and microclimate in predicting responses of organisms to climate change, and the need for more evidence on the outcomes of microclimate management.