Presented @CEMFOR seminars (http://www.cemfor.cat/) the 5th December 2016

1. Managing stand density to enhance the
adaptability of Scots pine stands to
climate change: a modelling approach
A.Ameztegui, A. Cabon, M. de Cáceres, L. Coll

2. Introduction | The context

3. Introduction | The context

4. Introduction | The context

5. Introduction | The recipe

6. Introduction | The recipe

7. Introduction | The recipe
➤ ↑ timber quality

8. Introduction | The recipe
➤ ↑ timber quality
➤ ↓ Interception losses
(↑ infiltration)

9. Introduction | The recipe
➤ ↑ timber quality
➤ ↓ Interception losses
(↑ infiltration)
➤ ↓ Stand transpiration

10. Introduction | The recipe
➤ ↑ timber quality
➤ ↓ Interception losses
(↑ infiltration)
➤ ↓ Stand transpiration
➤ Available water apportioned
among fewer trees

11. Introduction | The recipe
➤ ↑ timber quality
➤ ↓ Interception losses
(↑ infiltration)
➤ ↓ Stand transpiration
➤ Available water apportioned
among fewer trees
Positive effect on:

12. Introduction | The recipe
➤ ↑ timber quality
➤ ↓ Interception losses
(↑ infiltration)
➤ ↓ Stand transpiration
➤ Available water apportioned
among fewer trees
Positive effect on:
➤ ↑ tree vigour

13. Introduction | The recipe
➤ ↑ timber quality
➤ ↓ Interception losses
(↑ infiltration)
➤ ↓ Stand transpiration
➤ Available water apportioned
among fewer trees
Positive effect on:
➤ ↑ tree vigour
➤ ↑ WUE

14. Introduction | The recipe
➤ ↑ timber quality
➤ ↓ Interception losses
(↑ infiltration)
➤ ↓ Stand transpiration
➤ Available water apportioned
among fewer trees
Positive effect on:
➤ ↑ tree vigour
➤ ↑ WUE
➤ ↑resilience to drought events

15. Introduction | The recipe
➤ ↑ timber quality
➤ ↓ Interception losses
(↑ infiltration)
➤ ↓ Stand transpiration
➤ Available water apportioned
among fewer trees
Positive effect on:
➤ ↑ tree vigour
➤ ↑ WUE
➤ ↑resilience to drought events
➤ ↑ soil water content

16. Introduction | The problem

17. Introduction | The problem

18. Introduction | The problem
Transient effects

19. Introduction | The problem
Transient effects
Dependent on site,
thinning regime
climatic scenario

20. Introduction | The problem
Difficult long-term experiments
Impossible to assess future
climate

21. Introduction | Our suggestion
SORTIE-ND medfate
(swb)
mmwater
2011 2012 2013
020406080
Rainfall
PET
mmwater
2011 2012 2013
0123
Total evaporation
Plant ET
Bare soil E
Watercontent(%vol)
2011 2012 2013
0.00.10.20.30.40.5
Predicted
Measurements (6 CS616 probes, 0−30 cm, mean+/−1.96se)

22. Our objectives

23. ➤ Can we predict the post-thinning
dynamics?
Our objectives

24. ➤ Can we predict the post-thinning
dynamics?
➤ Effect of several factors
➤ Initial site conditions
➤ Climate scenario
➤ Thinning regime
Our objectives

25. ➤ Can we predict the post-thinning
dynamics?
➤ Effect of several factors
➤ Initial site conditions
➤ Climate scenario
➤ Thinning regime
➤ On several variables
➤ Forest production
➤ Water balance (blue water)
➤ Tree drought stress
Our objectives

26. ➤ Can we predict the post-thinning
dynamics?
➤ Effect of several factors
➤ Initial site conditions
➤ Climate scenario
➤ Thinning regime
➤ On several variables
➤ Forest production
➤ Water balance (blue water)
➤ Tree drought stress
Our objectives
Trade-offs

27. Methods | Case study
Pinus sylvestris
(Scots pine)
➤ 240,000 ha (17%)
➤ 2/3 monospecific
➤ 160,000 m3 timber (25%)

28. Methods | Case study
Pinus sylvestris
(Scots pine)

29. Methods | Case study
Pinus sylvestris
(Scots pine)
Foto: M. Beltrán
Foto: T. Valor
Foto: S.Martín

30. Humid
SiteTemp 8.7
Precip 828
Martonne 44.3
Mesic
SiteTemp 12.0
Precip 714.
Martonne 32.5
Xeric Site
Temp 12.5
Precip 564.
Martonne 25.1
Methods | Initial conditions
Pinus sylvestris
(Scots pine)

31. Humid
SiteTemp 8.7
Precip 828
Martonne 44.3
Mesic
SiteTemp 12.0
Precip 714.
Martonne 32.5
Xeric Site
Temp 12.5
Precip 564.
Martonne 25.1
Methods | Initial conditions
Pinus sylvestris
(Scots pine)

32. Methods | Thinning regime

33. Methods | Thinning regime
Control -10% AB -20% AB -30% AB
-40% AB -50% AB -60% AB -70% AB

34. 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
891011121314
Year
MeanAnnualTemp.
Humid
Scenario A2
y = 9.0 + 0.0277 * year ^ 1.125
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
891011121314
YearMeanAnnualTemp.
Humid
Scenario B2
y = 9.0 + 0.0916 * year ^ 0.728
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
11121314151617
Year
MeanAnnualTemp.
Mesic
Scenario A2
y = 12.0 + 0.0327 * year ^ 1.086
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
11121314151617
Year
MeanAnnualTemp. Mesic
Scenario B2
y = 12.0 + 0.1015 * year ^ 0.709
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
11121314151617
MeanAnnualTemp.
Xeric
Scenario A2
y = 12.5 + 0.0550 * year ^ 0.964
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
11121314151617
MeanAnnualTemp.
Xeric
Scenario B2
y = 12.5 + 0.1624 * year ^ 0.611
Methods | Climatic scenarios (temperature)

35. 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
891011121314
Year
MeanAnnualTemp.
Humid
Scenario A2
y = 9.0 + 0.0277 * year ^ 1.125
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
891011121314
YearMeanAnnualTemp.
Humid
Scenario B2
y = 9.0 + 0.0916 * year ^ 0.728
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
11121314151617
Year
MeanAnnualTemp.
Mesic
Scenario A2
y = 12.0 + 0.0327 * year ^ 1.086
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
11121314151617
Year
MeanAnnualTemp. Mesic
Scenario B2
y = 12.0 + 0.1015 * year ^ 0.709
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
11121314151617
MeanAnnualTemp.
Xeric
Scenario A2
y = 12.5 + 0.0550 * year ^ 0.964
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
11121314151617
MeanAnnualTemp.
Xeric
Scenario B2
y = 12.5 + 0.1624 * year ^ 0.611
+ 4.6 ºC
(47.8%)
+ 2.7 ºC
(26.7%)
+ 4.3 ºC
(35.8%)
+ 2.4 ºC
(20.0%)
+ 4.2 ºC
(33.6%)
+ 2.5 ºC
(20.0%)
Methods | Climatic scenarios (temperature)

36. 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
6007008009001000
Year
MeanAnnualPrec.
Humid
Scenario A2
y = 806.2 − 0.0009 * year ^ 2.63
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
6007008009001000
YearMeanAnnualPrec.
Humid
Scenario B2
y = 806.2 − 0.4773 * year ^ 0.92
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
500600700800900
Year
MeanAnnualPrec.
Mesic
Scenario A2
y = 714.2 − 0.0227 * year ^ 1.91
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
500600700800900
Year
MeanAnnualPrec.
Mesic
Scenario B2
y = 714.2 − 4.286 * year ^ 0.60
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
400500600700800
MeanAnnualPrec.
Xeric
Scenario A2
y = 564.3 − 5.1·e−6 * year ^ 3.62
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
400500600700800
MeanAnnualPrec.
Xeric
Scenario B2
y = 564.3 − 2.53·e−8 * year ^ 1.0
Methods | Climatic scenarios (precipitation)

37. 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
6007008009001000
Year
MeanAnnualPrec.
Humid
Scenario A2
y = 806.2 − 0.0009 * year ^ 2.63
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
6007008009001000
YearMeanAnnualPrec.
Humid
Scenario B2
y = 806.2 − 0.4773 * year ^ 0.92
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
500600700800900
Year
MeanAnnualPrec.
Mesic
Scenario A2
y = 714.2 − 0.0227 * year ^ 1.91
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
500600700800900
Year
MeanAnnualPrec.
Mesic
Scenario B2
y = 714.2 − 4.286 * year ^ 0.60
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
400500600700800
MeanAnnualPrec.
Xeric
Scenario A2
y = 564.3 − 5.1·e−6 * year ^ 3.62
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
400500600700800
MeanAnnualPrec.
Xeric
Scenario B2
y = 564.3 − 2.53·e−8 * year ^ 1.0
- 142 mm
(14.8%)
- 52 mm
(3.7%)
- 121 mm
(17.0%)
- 63 mm
(8.7%)
-64 mm
(10.3%)
- 1.0 mm
(0.1%)
Methods | Climatic scenarios (precipitation)

38. Modelling forest dynamics | SORTIE-ND

39. Modelling forest dynamics | SORTIE-ND
JABOWA
(Botkin et al. 1972)
SORTIE
Canham et al. (1996)
FORET
(Shugar and West, 1977)
SORTIE-ND: spatially-explicit, individually-based model
Lines, 2012

40. Modelling forest dynamics | SORTIE-ND
Allometry & resources Growth
Mortality Dispersal & recruitment
Climate change

41. Modelling forest dynamics | SORTIE-ND
Allometry & resources Growth
Mortality Dispersal & recruitment
Climate change

42. Modelling forest dynamics | SORTIE-ND
Gomez-Aparicio et al. 2011; Glob. Cha. Biol.

43. Modelling water balance | medfate wbm
VEGETATION
Forest structure
from SORTIE-ND
SOIL
Two layers
50 cm depth
Loamy texture
10-15% rock
LAI
Soil water holding
capacity
PET
CLIMATE
Rainfall
Interception
Surface run-off
Soil water content
Soil water potential
Transpiration
Evaporation
Whole plant
conductance

44. Modelling water balance | medfate wbm
Rainfall
Intercep.on
Evapora.on
Deep drainage
Bare soil
evapora.on
Plant transpira.on
Percola.on
Soil infiltra.on Runoff

45. Methods | Modelling approach

46. Methods | Modelling approach

47. Methods | Modelling approach
38
3
72 ini cond.
(10 rep)

48. NoCC CCB2 CCA2
20
40
60
20
40
60
20
40
60
PlotAPlotBPlotC
0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100
Year
BasalArea(m2·ha−1)
Intensity
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Type
Low
Results | Can we predict forest dynamics?

49. NoCC CCB2 CCA2
20
30
40
50
20
30
40
50
20
30
40
50
PlotAPlotBPlotC
0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100
Year
Meanquadraticdiameter(cm)
Intensity
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Type
Low
Results | Can we predict forest dynamics?

50. Results | Can we predict forest dynamics?

51. Results | Effects on forest production

52. Results | Effects on forest growth (duration)

53. Humid Mesic Xeric
30
40
50
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Bluewater(%)
Climate
NoCC
CCB2
CCA2
Humid Mesic Xeric
0.8
A
B
30
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Blue
Humid Mesic Xeric
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Thinning intensity (%)
Stressindex
B
Results | Effects on water balance (blue water)

54. 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Humid Mesic Xeric
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Thinning intensity (%)
Stressindex
B
Results | Effects on drought stress
Humid Mesic Xeric
30
40
50
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Bluewater(%)
Climate
NoCC
CCB2
CCA2
Humid Mesic Xeric
0.8
A
B

55. Humid Mesic Xeric
30
40
50
70 80 90 100 110 70 80 90 100 110 70 80 90 100 110
Bluewater(%)
Thinning
intensity
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Climate
NoCC
CCB2
CCA2
Humid Mesic Xeric
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
70 80 90 100 110 70 80 90 100 110 70 80 90 100 110
Final basal area (%)
Stressindex
A
B
Results | Trade-offs

56. Conclusions

57. ➤ Trade-off between production and
improvement in water status
Conclusions

58. ➤ Trade-off between production and
improvement in water status
➤ Trade-off site and climate-dependent
Conclusions

59. ➤ Trade-off between production and
improvement in water status
➤ Trade-off site and climate-dependent
➤ Simultaneous gain only possible at
humid sites or mesic sites (NoCC)
Conclusions

60. ➤ Trade-off between production and
improvement in water status
➤ Trade-off site and climate-dependent
➤ Simultaneous gain only possible at
humid sites or mesic sites (NoCC)
➤ Thinning interesting to increase
resistance to drought in xeric sites
Conclusions

61. ➤ Trade-off between production and
improvement in water status
➤ Trade-off site and climate-dependent
➤ Simultaneous gain only possible at
humid sites or mesic sites (NoCC)
➤ Thinning interesting to increase
resistance to drought in xeric sites
➤ In mesic sites, compromise between
production and water management
Conclusions

62. ➤ Trade-off between production and
improvement in water status
➤ Trade-off site and climate-dependent
➤ Simultaneous gain only possible at
humid sites or mesic sites (NoCC)
➤ Thinning interesting to increase
resistance to drought in xeric sites
➤ In mesic sites, compromise between
production and water management
➤ Under severe CC, very heavy thinning
needed
Conclusions

63. ➤ Trade-off between production and
improvement in water status
➤ Trade-off site and climate-dependent
➤ Simultaneous gain only possible at
humid sites or mesic sites (NoCC)
➤ Thinning interesting to increase
resistance to drought in xeric sites
➤ In mesic sites, compromise between
production and water management
➤ Under severe CC, very heavy thinning
needed
➤ In some cases, not enough (species
substitution?)
Conclusions

64. ➤ Trade-off between production and
improvement in water status
➤ Trade-off site and climate-dependent
➤ Simultaneous gain only possible at
humid sites or mesic sites (NoCC)
➤ Thinning interesting to increase
resistance to drought in xeric sites
➤ In mesic sites, compromise between
production and water management
➤ Under severe CC, very heavy thinning
needed
➤ In some cases, not enough (species
substitution?)
➤ No general recipes
Conclusions

65. GRÀCIES!
ameztegui@gmail.com

66. Results | Duration of the effects on blue water
Humid Mesic Xeric
0
20
40
60
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
T50,BW(years)
Climate
NoCC
CCB2
CCA2
Humid Mesic Xeric
75
A
B
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Humid Mesic Xeric
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Thinning intensity (%)
Stressindex
B

67. Results | Duration of the effects on drought stress0
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Humid Mesic Xeric
0
25
50
75
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Thinning intensity (%)
T50,stress(years)
B