Tree-line ...
Figure 2. Tree-line. (a) The simulated tree-line comparisons between the CRU-forced run and the RCAO-forced run. (b) The recent and the future tree-line comparisons in the RCAO-forced run. (Green: the CAVM tree-line boundary; blue: tree-line advance for the latter; red: tree-line retreat for the lat...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Still Image |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
IOP Publishing
2013
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1011560.v1 https://iop.figshare.com/articles/figure/_Tree_line/1011560/1 |
| Summary: | Figure 2. Tree-line. (a) The simulated tree-line comparisons between the CRU-forced run and the RCAO-forced run. (b) The recent and the future tree-line comparisons in the RCAO-forced run. (Green: the CAVM tree-line boundary; blue: tree-line advance for the latter; red: tree-line retreat for the latter; gray: no difference.) Abstract One major challenge to the improvement of regional climate scenarios for the northern high latitudes is to understand land surface feedbacks associated with vegetation shifts and ecosystem biogeochemical cycling. We employed a customized, Arctic version of the individual-based dynamic vegetation model LPJ-GUESS to simulate the dynamics of upland and wetland ecosystems under a regional climate model–downscaled future climate projection for the Arctic and Subarctic. The simulated vegetation distribution (1961–1990) agreed well with a composite map of actual arctic vegetation. In the future (2051–2080), a poleward advance of the forest–tundra boundary, an expansion of tall shrub ... |
|---|