Konic Julia, Heiling Carina, Haeler Elena, Chakraborty Debojyoti, Lapin Katharina, Schueler Silvio
Department for Forest Growth, Silviculture & Genetics, Austrian Research Centre for Forests (BFW), Vienna, Austria.
Department of Forest Biodiversity and Nature Conservation, Austrian Research Centre for Forests (BFW), Vienna, Austria.
Front Plant Sci. 2024 Jul 1;15:1402601. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1402601. eCollection 2024.
Forestry is facing an unprecedented challenging time. Due to climate change, major tree species, which until recently fulfilled major ecosystem services, are being lost and it is often unclear if forest conversion with other native or non-native tree species (NNT) are able to maintain or restore the endangered ecosystem services. Using data from the Austrian Forest Inventory, we analysed the current and future (2081-2100, RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5) productivity of forests, as well as their protective function (avalanches and rockfall). Five different species change scenarios were considered for the replacement of a tree species failing in the future. We used seven native tree species ( and ) and nine NNT (, a and ). The results show that no adaptation would lead to a loss of productivity and a decrease in tree species richness. The combined use of native and NNT is more favorable than purely using native species in terms of productivity and tree species richness. The impact of the different species change scenarios can vary greatly between the different environmental zones of Austria (Alpine south, Continental and Pannonian). The Pannonian zone would benefit from the use of NNT in terms of timber production. For the protection against avalanches or rockfall in alpine regions, NNT would not be an advantage, and it is more important if broadleaved or coniferous trees are used. Depending on whether timber production, protective function or tree species richness are considered, different tree species or species change scenarios can be recommended. Especially in protective forests, other aspects are essential compared to commercial forests. Our results provide a basis for forest owners/managers in three European environmental zones to make decisions on a sustainable selection of tree species to plant in the face of climate change.
林业正面临着前所未有的挑战时期。由于气候变化，直到最近还提供主要生态系统服务的主要树种正在消失，而且通常不清楚用其他本地或非本地树种（NNT）进行森林转换是否能够维持或恢复濒危的生态系统服务。利用奥地利森林清查的数据，我们分析了森林当前和未来（2081 - 2100年，代表性浓度路径4.5和代表性浓度路径8.5）的生产力及其防护功能（雪崩和落石）。考虑了五种不同的物种变化情景，以替代未来可能失败的树种。我们使用了七种本地树种（ 和 ）和九种非本地树种（ 、a和 ）。结果表明，不进行适应将导致生产力下降和树种丰富度降低。就生产力和树种丰富度而言，本地树种和非本地树种的联合使用比单纯使用本地树种更有利。不同物种变化情景对奥地利不同环境区域（阿尔卑斯山南麓、大陆性和潘诺尼亚）的影响可能有很大差异。潘诺尼亚地区在木材生产方面将受益于非本地树种的使用。对于高山地区的雪崩或落石防护，非本地树种并无优势，使用阔叶树或针叶树更为重要。根据考虑的是木材生产、防护功能还是树种丰富度，可以推荐不同的树种或物种变化情景。特别是在防护林方面，与商品林相比，其他方面至关重要。我们的研究结果为欧洲三个环境区域的森林所有者/管理者在面对气候变化时就可持续选择种植树种做出决策提供了依据。
