• Energy Research

AbstractForests are a substantial terrestrial carbon sink, but anthropogenic changes in land use and climate have considerably reduced the scale of this system1. Remote-sensing estimates to quantify carbon losses from global forests2–5 are characterized by considerable uncertainty and we lack a comprehensive ground-sourced evaluation to benchmark these estimates. Here we combine several ground-sourced6 and satellite-derived approaches2,7,8 to evaluate the scale of the global forest carbon potential outside agricultural and urban lands. Despite regional variation, the predictions demonstrated remarkable consistency at a global scale, with only a 12% difference between the ground-sourced and satellite-derived estimates. At present, global forest carbon storage is markedly under the natural potential, with a total deficit of 226 Gt (model range = 151–363 Gt) in areas with low human footprint. Most (61%, 139 Gt C) of this potential is in areas with existing forests, in which ecosystem protection can allow forests to recover to maturity. The remaining 39% (87 Gt C) of potential lies in regions in which forests have been removed or fragmented. Although forests cannot be a substitute for emissions reductions, our results support the idea2,3,9 that the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of diverse forests offer valuable contributions to meeting global climate and biodiversity targets.

AbstractAimThe scale of environmental data is often defined by their extent (spatial area, temporal duration) and resolution (grain size, temporal interval). Although describing climate data scale via these terms is appropriate for most meteorological applications, for ecology and biogeography, climate data of the same spatiotemporal resolution and extent may differ in their relevance to an organism. Here, we propose that climate proximity, or how well climate data represent the actual conditions that an organism is exposed to, is more important for ecological realism than the spatiotemporal resolution of the climate data.LocationTemperature comparison in nine countries across four continents; ecological case studies in Alberta (Canada), Sabah (Malaysia) and North Carolina/Tennessee (USA).Time Period1960–2018.Major Taxa StudiedCase studies with flies, mosquitoes and salamanders, but concepts relevant to all life on earth.MethodsWe compare the accuracy of two macroclimate data sources (ERA5 and WorldClim) and a novel microclimate model (microclimf) in predicting soil temperatures. We then use ERA5, WorldClim and microclimf to drive ecological models in three case studies: temporal (fly phenology), spatial (mosquito thermal suitability) and spatiotemporal (salamander range shifts) ecological responses.ResultsFor predicting soil temperatures, microclimf had 24.9% and 16.4% lower absolute bias than ERA5 and WorldClim respectively. Across the case studies, we find that increasing proximity (from macroclimate to microclimate) yields a 247% improvement in performance of ecological models on average, compared to 18% and 9% improvements from increasing spatial resolution 20‐fold, and temporal resolution 30‐fold respectively.Main ConclusionsWe propose that increasing climate proximity, even if at the sacrifice of finer climate spatiotemporal resolution, may improve ecological predictions. We emphasize biophysically informed approaches, rather than generic formulations, when quantifying ecoclimatic relationships. Redefining the scale of climate through the lens of the organism itself helps reveal mechanisms underlying how climate shapes ecological systems.

Abstract Species’ traits and environmental conditions determine the abundance of tree species across the globe. The extent to which traits of dominant and rare tree species differ remains untested across a broad environmental range, limiting our understanding of how species traits and the environment shape forest functional composition. We use a global dataset of tree composition of >22,000 forest plots and 11 traits of 1663 tree species to ask how locally dominant and rare species differ in their trait values, and how these differences are driven by climatic gradients in temperature and water availability in forest biomes across the globe. We find three consistent trait differences between locally dominant and rare species across all biomes; dominant species are taller, have softer wood and higher loading on the multivariate stem strategy axis (related to narrow tracheids and thick bark). The difference between traits of dominant and rare species is more strongly driven by temperature compared to water availability, as temperature might affect a larger number of traits. Therefore, climate change driven global temperature rise may have a strong effect on trait differences between dominant and rare tree species and may lead to changes in species abundances and therefore strong community reassembly.