Do Experimental Forests and Ranges of the Southeastern United States Represent the Climate, Ecosystem Structure, and Ecosystem Functions of the Region?

Abstract There are twenty experimental forest and range sites (EFRs) across the southeastern United States that are currently maintained by the USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) to conduct forest ecosystem research for addressing ecosystem management challenges. The overall objective of this study was to use multiple gridded datasets to assess the extent to which the twenty EFRs represent the climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of southeastern forests. The EFRs represent the large variability of climate conditions across the region relatively well, but we identified small representation gaps. The representativeness of ecosystem structure by these EFRs can be improved by establishing EFRs in forests with relatively low tree cover, leaf area index, or tree canopy height. The current EFRs also represent the forest ecosystem functions of the region relatively well, although areas with intermediate and low aboveground biomass and water yield are not well represented. The trends in climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions were generally consistent between the region and the EFRs. Our study indicates that the current EFRs represent the region relatively well, but establishing additional EFRs in specific areas within the region could help more completely assess how southeastern forests respond to climate change, disturbance, and management practices. Study Implications: This study across the experimental forests and ranges (EFRs) and the southeastern forest region fills the knowledge gap regarding climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of EFRs in the context of the broader southeastern forest region. Understanding ecosystem functions and structures across the EFR network can help the Southern Research Station to address new research questions. Our study indicates that the current EFRs represent the climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of southeastern forests well. However, establishing additional EFRs in certain regions could help more completely assess how southeastern forests respond to climate change, disturbance, and management practices.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Forestry
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvae020
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.28

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do Experimental Forests and Ranges of the Southeastern United States Represent the Climate, Ecosystem Structure, and Ecosystem Functions of the Region?

Kevin M. Potter, Johnny Boggs, Jingfeng Xiao, Ge Sun et al.
1 citations
Journal of Forestry
Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
0.28
article

Do Experimental Forests and Ranges of the Southeastern United States Represent the Climate, Ecosystem Structure, and Ecosystem Functions of the Region?

Kevin M. Potter, Johnny Boggs, Jingfeng Xiao, Ge Sun, Steven G. McNulty, Qingyuan Zhang
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract There are twenty experimental forest and range sites (EFRs) across the southeastern United States that are currently maintained by the USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) to conduct forest ecosystem research for addressing ecosystem management challenges. The overall objective of this study was to use multiple gridded datasets to assess the extent to which the twenty EFRs represent the climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of southeastern forests. The EFRs represent the large variability of climate conditions across the region relatively well, but we identified small representation gaps. The representativeness of ecosystem structure by these EFRs can be improved by establishing EFRs in forests with relatively low tree cover, leaf area index, or tree canopy height. The current EFRs also represent the forest ecosystem functions of the region relatively well, although areas with intermediate and low aboveground biomass and water yield are not well represented. The trends in climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions were generally consistent between the region and the EFRs. Our study indicates that the current EFRs represent the region relatively well, but establishing additional EFRs in specific areas within the region could help more completely assess how southeastern forests respond to climate change, disturbance, and management practices. Study Implications: This study across the experimental forests and ranges (EFRs) and the southeastern forest region fills the knowledge gap regarding climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of EFRs in the context of the broader southeastern forest region. Understanding ecosystem functions and structures across the EFR network can help the Southern Research Station to address new research questions. Our study indicates that the current EFRs represent the climate, ecosystem structure, and ecosystem functions of southeastern forests well. However, establishing additional EFRs in certain regions could help more completely assess how southeastern forests respond to climate change, disturbance, and management practices.

Journal of ForestryVol. 122(5-6)
University of New Hampshire (US), Triangle (US), Southern Research Station (US), Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center (US), University of Maryland, College Park (US)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 43%
Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
0.28
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.