Search

Ecologists have long studied patterns, directions and tempos of change, but there is a pressing need to extend current understanding to empirical observations of abrupt changes as climate warming accelerates. Abrupt changes in ecological systems (ACES)-changes that are fast in time or fast relative to their drivers-are ubiquitous and increasing in frequency. Powerful theoretical frameworks exist, yet applications in real-world landscapes to detect, explain and anticipate ACES have lagged. We highlight five insights emerging from empirical studies of ACES across diverse ecosystems: (i) ecological systems show ACES in some dimensions but not others; (ii) climate extremes may be more important than mean climate in generating ACES; (iii) interactions among multiple drivers often produce ACES; (iv) contingencies, such as ecological memory, frequency and sequence of disturbances, and spatial context are important; and (v) tipping points are often (but not always) associated with ACES. We suggest research priorities to advance understanding of ACES in the face of climate change. Progress in understanding ACES requires strong integration of scientific approaches (theory, observations, experiments and process-based models) and high-quality empirical data drawn from a diverse array of ecosystems. This article is part of the theme issue 'Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions'.

Changing climate and disturbance regimes are increasingly challenging the resilience of forest ecosystems around the globe. A powerful indicator for the loss of resilience is regeneration failure, that is, the inability of the prevailing tree species to regenerate after disturbance. Regeneration failure can result from the interplay among disturbance changes (e.g., larger and more frequent fires), altered climate conditions (e.g., increased drought), and functional traits (e.g., method of seed dispersal). This complexity makes projections of regeneration failure challenging. Here we applied a novel simulation approach assimilating data-driven fire projections with vegetation responses from process modeling by means of deep neural networks. We (i) quantified the future probability of regeneration failure; (ii) identified spatial hotspots of regeneration failure; and (iii) assessed how current forest types differ in their ability to regenerate under future climate and fire. We focused on the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (2.9 × 106  ha of forest) in the Rocky Mountains of the USA, which has experienced large wildfires in the past and is expected to undergo drastic changes in climate and fire in the future. We simulated four climate scenarios until 2100 at a fine spatial grain (100 m). Both wildfire activity and unstocked forest area increased substantially throughout the 21st century in all simulated scenarios. By 2100, between 28% and 59% of the forested area failed to regenerate, indicating considerable loss of resilience. Areas disproportionally at risk occurred where fires are not constrained by topography and in valleys aligned with predominant winds. High-elevation forest types not adapted to fire (i.e., Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa as well as non-serotinous Pinus contorta var. latifolia forests) were especially vulnerable to regeneration failure. We conclude that changing climate and fire could exceed the resilience of forests in a substantial portion of Greater Yellowstone, with profound implications for carbon, biodiversity, and recreation.

Questions: Climate extremes are predicted to become more common in many ecosystems. Climate extremes can promote and interact with disturbances, but the combined effects of climate extremes and disturbances have not been quantified in many ecosystems. In this study, we ask whether the dual impact of a climate extreme and concomitant disturbance (wildfire) has a greater affect than a climate extreme alone. Location: Tallgrass prairie in the Konza Prairie Biological Station, northeastern Kansas, USA. Methods: We quantified the response of a tallgrass prairie plant community to a 2‐year climate extreme of low growing‐season precipitation and high temperatures. In the first year of the climate extreme, a subset of plots was burned by a growing‐season wildfire. This natural experiment allowed us to compare community responses to a climate extreme with and without wildfire. Results: In plots exposed to the climate extreme but not wildfire, community structure, diversity, and composition showed minor to insignificant changes, such as a 20% reduction in grass cover and a slight increase in species diversity. Plots exposed to both the climate extreme and wildfire underwent larger changes, including an 80% reduction in grass cover, 50% increase in forb cover, and increased plant diversity. Two years after the climate extreme, structural shifts in burned plots showed little sign of recovery, indicating a potentially lasting shift in plant community structure. Conclusions: Our results suggest that community responses to climate extremes need to account for climate‐related disturbances — in this case, high temperatures, drought and wildfire. This response diverged from our expectation that heat, drought, and an additional fire would favor grasses. Although growing‐season wildfires in tallgrass prairie have been rare in recent decades, they will likely become more common with climate change, potentially leading to changes in grassland structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Resilience has become a common goal for science-based natural resource management, particularly in the context of changing climate and disturbance regimes. Integrating varying perspectives and definitions of resilience is a complex and often unrecognized challenge to applying resilience concepts to social–ecological systems (SESs) management. Using wildfire as an example, we develop a framework to expose and separate two important dimensions of resilience: the inherent properties that maintain structure, function, or states of an SES and the human perceptions of desirable or valued components of an SES. In doing so, the framework distinguishes between value-free and human-derived, value-explicit dimensions of resilience. Four archetypal scenarios highlight that ecological resilience and human values do not always align and that recognizing and anticipating potential misalignment is critical for developing effective management goals. Our framework clarifies existing resilience theory, connects literature across disciplines, and facilitates use of the resilience concept in research and land-management applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abrupt ecological changes are, by definition, those that occur over short periods of time relative to typical rates of change for a given ecosystem. The potential for such changes is growing due to anthropogenic pressures, which challenges the resilience of societies and ecosystems. Abrupt ecological changes are difficult to diagnose because they can arise from a variety of circumstances, including rapid changes in external drivers (e.g., climate, or resource extraction), nonlinear responses to gradual changes in drivers, and interactions among multiple drivers and disturbances. We synthesize strategies for identifying causes of abrupt ecological change and highlight instances where abrupt changes are likely. Diagnosing abrupt changes and inferring causation are increasingly important as society seek to adapt to rapid, multifaceted environmental changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]