• Energy Research

A significant concern about Metabolic Scaling Theory (MST) in real forests relates to consistent differences between the values of power law scaling exponents of tree primary size measures used to estimate mass and those predicted by MST. Here we consider why observed scaling exponents for diameter and height relationships deviate from MST predictions across three semi-arid conifer forests in relation to: (1) tree condition and physical form, (2) the level of inter-tree competition (e.g. open vs closed stand structure), (3) increasing tree age, and (4) differences in site productivity. Scaling exponent values derived from non-linear least-squares regression for trees in excellent condition (n = 381) were above the MST prediction at the 95% confidence level, while the exponent for trees in good condition were no different than MST (n = 926). Trees that were in fair or poor condition, characterized as diseased, leaning, or sparsely crowned had exponent values below MST predictions (n = 2,058), as did recently dead standing trees (n = 375). Exponent value of the mean-tree model that disregarded tree condition (n = 3,740) was consistent with other studies that reject MST scaling. Ostensibly, as stand density and competition increase trees exhibited greater morphological plasticity whereby the majority had characteristically fair or poor growth forms. Fitting by least-squares regression biases the mean-tree model scaling exponent toward values that are below MST idealized predictions. For 368 trees from Arizona with known establishment dates, increasing age had no significant impact on expected scaling. We further suggest height to diameter ratios below MST relate to vertical truncation caused by limitation in plant water availability. Even with environmentally imposed height limitation, proportionality between height and diameter scaling exponents were consistent with the predictions of MST.

AbstractMountains are vital to ecosystems and human society given their influence on global carbon and water cycles. Yet the extent to which topography regulates montane forest carbon uptake and storage remains poorly understood. To address this knowledge gap, we compared forest aboveground carbon loading to topographic metrics describing energy balance and water availability across three headwater catchments of the Boulder Creek Watershed, Colorado, USA. The catchments range from 1800 to 3500 m above mean sea level with 46–102 cm/yr mean annual precipitation and −1.2° to 12.3°C mean annual temperature. In all three catchments, we found mean forest carbon loading consistently increased from ridges (27 ± 19 Mg C ha) to valley bottoms (60 ± 28 Mg C ha). Low topographic positions held up to 185 ± 76 Mg C ha, more than twice the peak value of upper positions. Toe slopes fostered disproportionately high net carbon uptake relative to other topographic positions. Carbon storage was on average 20–40 Mg C ha greater on north to northeast aspects than on south to southwest aspects, a pattern most pronounced in the highest elevation, coldest and wettest catchment. Both the peak and mean aboveground carbon storage of the three catchments, crossing an 11°C range in temperature and doubling of local precipitation, defied the expectation of an optimal elevation‐gradient climatic zone for net primary production. These results have important implications for models of forest sensitivity to climate change, as well as to predicted estimates of continental carbon reservoirs.

Abstract Fire is an integral component of ecosystems globally and a tool that humans have harnessed for millennia. Altered fire regimes are a fundamental cause and consequence of global change, impacting people and the biophysical systems on which they depend. As part of the newly emerging Anthropocene, marked by human-caused climate change and radical changes to ecosystems, fire danger is increasing, and fires are having increasingly devastating impacts on human health, infrastructure, and ecosystem services. Increasing fire danger is a vexing problem that requires deep transdisciplinary, trans-sector, and inclusive partnerships to address. Here, we outline barriers and opportunities in the next generation of fire science and provide guidance for investment in future research. We synthesize insights needed to better address the long-standing challenges of innovation across disciplines to (i) promote coordinated research efforts; (ii) embrace different ways of knowing and knowledge generation; (iii) promote exploration of fundamental science; (iv) capitalize on the “firehose” of data for societal benefit; and (v) integrate human and natural systems into models across multiple scales. Fire science is thus at a critical transitional moment. We need to shift from observation and modeled representations of varying components of climate, people, vegetation, and fire to more integrative and predictive approaches that support pathways toward mitigating and adapting to our increasingly flammable world, including the utilization of fire for human safety and benefit. Only through overcoming institutional silos and accessing knowledge across diverse communities can we effectively undertake research that improves outcomes in our more fiery future.