Compounding human stressors cause major regeneration debt in over half of eastern US forests
Abstract
The future of temperate forests in the face of global change and anthropogenic stressors remains uncertain. The regeneration stage, which is a critical bottleneck for many organisms, is a key indicator of forest health, future canopy composition and forest adaptive capacity. In trees, seemingly healthy forests can be at long‐term risk due to insufficient juveniles to replace them (regeneration failure), or compositional differences between juveniles and adults (regeneration mismatch). We propose ‘regeneration debt’ to collectively describe regeneration failure and mismatch in analogy to extinction debt. To demonstrate this concept, we conducted a macroecological analysis of regeneration debt and anthropogenic stressors in eastern US forests. Using U.S. Forest Service‐Forest Inventory and Analysis data, we quantified regeneration debt in 18 states from Maine to South Carolina, and evaluated the influence of site, anthropogenic stressors and climate drivers in the most affected regions. We identified three distinct regions, with little debt in the north, moderate debt in the south and severe regeneration debt in the central, mid‐Atlantic region. In this region, multiple anthropogenic stressors (invasive plants, deer overabundance and land use) were associated with both low‐regeneration abundance and the prevalence of disease‐prone and/or suboptimal species. Synthesis and applications. Without management intervention, the severe regeneration debt in the mid‐Atlantic region will likely lead to long‐term declines in forest cover, with cascading negative effects on forest‐dependent taxa and ecosystem services. Moreover, the location of the regeneration debt, which is at the northern edge of and involves many of the tree species that are predicted to gain suitable habitat in the Northeastern US, has consequences that extend far beyond its current geographic extent. In fact, this regeneration debt may already be functioning as a barrier to poleward tree migration. Our results demonstrate the value of regeneration debt as an indicator of ecosystem health and forest adaptive capacity.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Regeneration debt (lack of regeneration and/or compositional mismatch between regeneration and canopy layers) can lead to shifts in forest composition, structure, and, in extreme cases, forest loss.
“The concept of regeneration debt was developed to collectively describe the patterns of regeneration failure and compositional mismatch that, if prolonged, will lead to a shift in canopy composition and structure and, ultimately, forest loss in extreme cases (Miller & McGill, 2019).”
From Overabundant deer and invasive plants drive widespread regeneration debt in eastern United States national parks (2023) · cites this paper as Miller & McGill, 2019
Cites
Russell, M. B., Woodall, C. W., Potter, K. M., Walters, B. F., Domke, G. M., & Oswalt, C. M. (2017) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2016.10.038 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Impacts of white-tailed deer on regional patterns of forest tree recruitment
Bradshaw, L., & Waller, D. M. (2016) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2016.05.019 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Kain, M., Battaglia, L., Royo, A., & Carson, W. P. (2011) · The Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society · doi:10.3159/torrey-d-11-00018.1 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Climate-driven risks to the climate mitigation potential of forests
Anderegg, W. R. L., Trugman, A. T., Badgley, G., Anderson, C. M., Bartuska, A., Ciais, P., Cullenward, D., Field, C. B., Freeman, J., Goetz, S. J., et al. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaz7005 · Cited by 854 · see citing works
Miller, K. M., Perles, S. J., Schmit, J. P., Matthews, E. R., Weed, A. S., Comiskey, J. A., Marshall, M. R., Nelson, P., & Fisichelli, N. A. (2023) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1002/eap.2837 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Miller, K. M., & McGill, B. J.
- Affiliations
- National Park Service (US)
- University of Maine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Miller, Kathryn M.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-03-21
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1355-1366
- ISSN
- 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2664
- OpenAlex
- W2918885356
- Cited by
- 72
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 4.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Applied Ecology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Park Service
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Forest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
- Keywords
- regeneration failure, anthropogenic pressure, temperate forests, invasive plants, deer overabundance, land use, tree species composition, forest health, climate drivers
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review