Conservation Biology Institute, Corvallis, Oregon, United States of America.
Environmental Sciences Program, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2019 Oct 25;14(10):e0222051. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222051. eCollection 2019.
Dynamic global vegetation model (DGVM) projections are often put forth to aid resource managers in climate change-related decision making. However, interpreting model results and understanding their uncertainty can be difficult. Sources of uncertainty include embedded assumptions about atmospheric CO2 levels, uncertain climate projections driving DGVMs, and DGVM algorithm selection. For western Oregon and Washington, we implemented an Environmental Evaluation Modeling System (EEMS) decision support model using MC2 DGVM results to characterize biomass loss risk. MC2 results were driven by climate projections from 20 General Circulation Models (GCMs) and Earth System Models (ESMs), under Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) 4.5 and 8.5, with and without assumed fire suppression, for three different time periods. We produced maps of mean, minimum, and maximum biomass loss risk and uncertainty for each RCP / +/- fire suppression / time period. We characterized the uncertainty due to RCP, fire suppression, and climate projection choice. Finally, we evaluated whether fire or climate maladaptation mortality was the dominant driver of risk for each model run. The risk of biomass loss generally increases in current high biomass areas within the study region through time. The pattern of increased risk is generally south to north and upslope into the Coast and Cascade mountain ranges and along the coast. Uncertainty from climate future choice is greater than that attributable to RCP or +/- fire suppression. Fire dominates as the driving factor for biomass loss risk in more model runs than mortality. This method of interpreting DGVM results and the associated uncertainty provides managers with data in a form directly applicable to their concerns and should prove helpful in adaptive management planning.
动态全球植被模型 (DGVM) 预测常被用于帮助资源管理者在气候变化相关决策中。然而,解释模型结果和理解其不确定性可能具有挑战性。不确定性的来源包括对大气 CO2 水平的隐含假设、驱动 DGVM 的不确定气候预测,以及 DGVM 算法选择。在俄勒冈州西部和华盛顿州,我们使用 MC2 DGVM 结果实施了环境评估建模系统 (EEMS) 决策支持模型,以描述生物量损失风险。MC2 结果由 20 个通用环流模型 (GCM) 和地球系统模型 (ESM) 的气候预测驱动,在 RCP4.5 和 RCP8.5 下,有和没有假设的火灾抑制,分为三个不同的时间段。我们为每个 RCP/ +/- 火灾抑制/时间段生成了平均、最小和最大生物量损失风险和不确定性的地图。我们描述了由于 RCP、火灾抑制和气候预测选择引起的不确定性。最后,我们评估了每个模型运行中是火灾还是气候适应不良死亡率是风险的主要驱动因素。随着时间的推移,研究区域内当前高生物量地区的生物量损失风险普遍增加。风险增加的模式通常是从南到北,从海岸山脉和喀斯喀特山脉向上坡,以及沿着海岸。气候未来选择的不确定性大于 RCP 或 +/- 火灾抑制的不确定性。在更多的模型运行中,火灾是生物量损失风险的驱动因素,而不是死亡率。这种解释 DGVM 结果和相关不确定性的方法为管理者提供了直接适用于他们关注点的数据,应该有助于适应性管理规划。