Search

Abstract: Information on the response of vegetation to different environmental drivers, including rainfall, forms a critical input to ecosystem models. Currently, such models are run based on parameters that, in some cases, are either assumed or lack supporting evidence (e.g., that vegetation growth across Africa is rainfall‐driven). A limited number of studies have reported that the onset of rain across Africa does not fully explain the onset of vegetation growth, for example, drawing on the observation of prerain flush effects in some parts of Africa. The spatial extent of this prerain green‐up effect, however, remains unknown, leaving a large gap in our understanding that may bias ecosystem modelling. This paper provides the most comprehensive spatial assessment to‐date of the magnitude and frequency of the different patterns of phenology response to rainfall across Africa and for different vegetation types. To define the relations between phenology and rainfall, we investigated the spatial variation in the difference, in number of days, between the start of rainy season (SRS) and start of vegetation growing season (SOS); and between the end of rainy season (ERS) and end of vegetation growing season (EOS). We reveal a much more extensive spread of prerain green‐up over Africa than previously reported, with prerain green‐up being the norm rather than the exception. We also show the relative sparsity of postrain green‐up, confined largely to the Sudano‐Sahel region. While the prerain green‐up phenomenon is well documented, its large spatial extent was not anticipated. Our results, thus, contrast with the widely held view that rainfall drives the onset and end of the vegetation growing season across Africa. Our findings point to a much more nuanced role of rainfall in Africa's vegetation growth cycle than previously thought, specifically as one of a set of several drivers, with important implications for ecosystem modelling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change is having a significant impact on ecosystem services and is likely to become increasingly important as this phenomenon intensifies. Future impacts can be difficult to assess as they often involve long timescales, dynamic systems with high uncertainties, and are typically confounded by other drivers of change. Despite a growing literature on climate change impacts on ecosystem services, no quantitative syntheses exist. Hence, we lack an overarching understanding of the impacts of climate change, how they are being assessed, and the extent to which other drivers, uncertainties, and decision making are incorporated. To address this, we systematically reviewed the peer-reviewed literature that assesses climate change impacts on ecosystem services at subglobal scales. We found that the impact of climate change on most types of services was predominantly negative (59% negative, 24% mixed, 4% neutral, 13% positive), but varied across services, drivers, and assessment methods. Although uncertainty was usually incorporated, there were substantial gaps in the sources of uncertainty included, along with the methods used to incorporate them. We found that relatively few studies integrated decision making, and even fewer studies aimed to identify solutions that were robust to uncertainty. For management or policy to ensure the delivery of ecosystem services, integrated approaches that incorporate multiple drivers of change and account for multiple sources of uncertainty are needed. This is undoubtedly a challenging task, but ignoring these complexities can result in misleading assessments of the impacts of climate change, suboptimal management outcomes, and the inefficient allocation of resources for climate adaptation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The need for rigorous analyses of climate impacts has never been more crucial. Current textbooks state that climate directly influences ecosystem annual net primary productivity (NPP), emphasizing the urgent need to monitor the impacts of climate change. A recent paper challenged this consensus, arguing, based on an analysis of NPP for 1247 woody plant communities across global climate gradients, that temperature and precipitation have negligible direct effects on NPP and only perhaps have indirect effects by constraining total stand biomass (Mtot) and stand age (a). The authors of that study concluded that the length of the growing season (lgs) might have a minor influence on NPP, an effect they considered not to be directly related to climate. In this article, we describe flaws that affected that study's conclusions and present novel analyses to disentangle the effects of stand variables and climate in determining NPP. We re-analyzed the same database to partition the direct and indirect effects of climate on NPP, using three approaches: maximum-likelihood model selection, independent-effects analysis, and structural equation modeling. These new analyses showed that about half of the global variation in NPP could be explained by Mtot combined with climate variables and supported strong and direct influences of climate independently of Mtot, both for NPP and for net biomass change averaged across the known lifetime of the stands (ABC = average biomass change). We show that lgs is an important climate variable, intrinsically correlated with, and contributing to mean annual temperature and precipitation (Tann and Pann), all important climatic drivers of NPP. Our analyses provide guidance for statistical and mechanistic analyses of climate drivers of ecosystem processes for predictive modeling and provide novel evidence supporting the strong, direct role of climate in determining vegetation productivity at the global scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]