Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 399

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Structural overshoot of tree growth with climate variability and the global spectrum of drought‐induced forest dieback

Open access
Jump, Alistair S., Ruiz‐Benito, Paloma, Greenwood, Sarah, Allen, Craig D., Kitzberger, Thomas, Fensham, Rod, Martínez‐Vilalta, Jordi, Lloret, Francisco·2017·Global Change Biology

Abstract

Ongoing climate change poses significant threats to plant function and distribution. Increased temperatures and altered precipitation regimes amplify drought frequency and intensity, elevating plant stress and mortality. Large‐scale forest mortality events will have far‐reaching impacts on carbon and hydrological cycling, biodiversity, and ecosystem services. However, biogeographical theory and global vegetation models poorly represent recent forest die‐off patterns. Furthermore, as trees are sessile and long‐lived, their responses to climate extremes are substantially dependent on historical factors. We show that periods of favourable climatic and management conditions that facilitate abundant tree growth can lead to structural overshoot of aboveground tree biomass due to a subsequent temporal mismatch between water demand and availability. When environmental favourability declines, increases in water and temperature stress that are protracted, rapid, or both, drive a gradient of tree structural responses that can modify forest self‐thinning relationships. Responses ranging from premature leaf senescence and partial canopy dieback to whole‐tree mortality reduce canopy leaf area during the stress period and for a lagged recovery window thereafter. Such temporal mismatches of water requirements from availability can occur at local to regional scales throughout a species geographical range. As climate change projections predict large future fluctuations in both wet and dry conditions, we expect forests to become increasingly structurally mismatched to water availability and thus overbuilt during more stressful episodes. By accounting for the historical context of biomass development, our approach can explain previously problematic aspects of large‐scale forest mortality, such as why it can occur throughout the range of a species and yet still be locally highly variable, and why some events seem readily attributable to an ongoing drought while others do not. This refined understanding can facilitate better projections of structural overshoot responses, enabling improved prediction of changes in forest distribution and function from regional to global scales.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gcb.13636

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 399

Metadata

Authors
Jump, A. S., Ruiz‐Benito, P., Greenwood, S., Allen, C. D., Kitzberger, T., Fensham, R., Martínez‐Vilalta, J., & Lloret, F.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-03-03
Volume
23
Issue
9
Pages
3742-3757
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2582977415
Cited by
399
References
11
FWCI
16.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.