Guidelines and considerations for designing field experiments simulating precipitation extremes in forest ecosystems

Heidi Asbjornsen; John L. Campbell; Katie A. Jennings; Matthew A. Vadeboncoeur; Cameron McIntire; Pamela H. Templer; Richard P. Phillips; Taryn L. Bauerle; Michael C. Dietze; Serita D. Frey; Peter M. Groffman; Rosella Guerrieri; Paul J. Hanson; Eric P. Kelsey; Alan K. Knapp; Nathan G. McDowell; Patrick Meir; Kimberly A. Novick; Scott V. Ollinger; Will T. Pockman; Paul G. Schaberg; Stan D. Wullschleger; Melinda D. Smith; Lindsey E. Rustad

doi:10.1111/2041-210X.13094

Guidelines and considerations for designing field experiments simulating precipitation extremes in forest ecosystems

Heidi Asbjornsen, John L. Campbell, Katie A. Jennings, Matthew A. Vadeboncoeur, Cameron McIntire, Pamela H. Templer, Richard P. Phillips, Taryn L. Bauerle, Michael C. Dietze, Serita D. Frey, Peter M. Groffman, Rosella Guerrieri, Paul J. Hanson, Eric P. Kelsey, Alan K. Knapp, Nathan G. McDowell, Patrick Meir, Kimberly A. Novick, Scott V. Ollinger, Will T. PockmanPaul G. Schaberg, Stan D. Wullschleger, Melinda D. Smith, Lindsey E. Rustad

Ecosystem Processes

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

32 Scopus citations

Abstract

Precipitation regimes are changing in response to climate change, yet understanding of how forest ecosystems respond to extreme droughts and pluvials remains incomplete. As future precipitation extremes will likely fall outside the range of historical variability, precipitation manipulation experiments (PMEs) are critical to advancing knowledge about potential ecosystem responses. However, few PMEs have been conducted in forests compared to short-statured ecosystems, and forest PMEs have unique design requirements and constraints. Moreover, past forest PMEs have lacked coordination, limiting cross-site comparisons. Here, we review and synthesize approaches, challenges, and opportunities for conducting PMEs in forests, with the goal of guiding design decisions, while maximizing the potential for coordination. We reviewed 63 forest PMEs at 70 sites world-wide. Workshops, meetings, and communications with experimentalists were used to generate and build consensus around approaches for addressing the key challenges and enhancing coordination. Past forest PMEs employed a variety of study designs related to treatment level, replication, plot and infrastructure characteristics, and measurement approaches. Important considerations for establishing new forest PMEs include: selecting appropriate treatment levels to reach ecological thresholds; balancing cost, logistical complexity, and effectiveness in infrastructure design; and preventing unintended water subsidies. Response variables in forest PMEs were organized into three broad tiers reflecting increasing complexity and resource intensiveness, with the first tier representing a recommended core set of common measurements. Differences in site conditions combined with unique research questions of experimentalists necessitate careful adaptation of guidelines for forest PMEs to balance local objectives with coordination among experiments. We advocate adoption of a common framework for coordinating forest PME design to enhance cross-site comparability and advance fundamental knowledge about the response and sensitivity of diverse forest ecosystems to precipitation extremes.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	2310-2325
Number of pages	16
Journal	Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Volume	9
Issue number	12
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13094
State	Published - Dec 2018

Funding

This project was supported by the Northeastern States Research Cooperative through funding made available by the USDA Forest Service. Additional funding was provided by the Iola Hubbard Climate Change Endowment at the University of New Hampshire, the NSF-funded Hubbard Brook Long-Term Ecological Research project, NASA grant NNX14AD31G, and the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station via a USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture McIntire-Stennis Project (Scientific Contribution Number NH00071-M). Participation of P.J.H. and S.D.W. was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science’s Terrestrial Ecosystem Science program. N.G.M. was supported by Pacific Northwest National Labs’ LDRD program. R.G. was supported by the MSCA-IF 2015 (grant 705432) within the EU-Horizon2020 program. R.P.P., M.D.S., and A.K.K. were supported by NSF’s Research Coordination Network Program (DEB 1701652). Conclusions and opinions in this paper are those of the authors and not of the funding agencies. New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station, Grant/Award Number: NH00071-M; Northern States Research Cooperative, Grant/Award Number: 14-DG-11242307- 142; National Science Foundation Long-Term Ecological Research, Grant/Award Number: 1637685; USDA Forest Service; University of New Hampshire; NASA, Grant/Award Number: NNX14AD31G; USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture McIntire-Stennis Project, Grant/Award Number: NH00071-M; U.S. Department of Energy; Office of Science’s Terrestrial Ecosystem Science program; Pacific Northwest National Labs’ LDRD program; MSCA-IF 2015; EU-Horizon2020 program; NSF’s Research Coordination Network Program This project was supported by the Northeastern States Research Cooperative through funding made available by the USDA Forest Service. Additional funding was provided by the Iola Hubbard Climate Change Endowment at the University of New Hampshire, the NSF-funded Hubbard Brook Long-Term Ecological Research project, NASA grant NNX14AD31G, and the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station via a USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture McIntire-Stennis Project (Scientific Contribution Number NH00071-M). Participation of P.J.H. and S.D.W. was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science's Terrestrial Ecosystem Science program. N.G.M. was supported by Pacific Northwest National Labs? LDRD program. R.G. was supported by the MSCA-IF 2015 (grant 705432) within the EU-Horizon2020 program. R.P.P., M.D.S., and A.K.K. were supported by NSF's Research Coordination Network Program (DEB 1701652). Conclusions and opinions in this paper are those of the authors and not of the funding agencies.

Funders	Funder number
EU-Horizon2020
NSF-funded
National Science Foundation Long-Term Ecological Research
New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station
USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture McIntire-Stennis Project
National Science Foundation	DEB 1701652, 1637685
U.S. Department of Energy
National Aeronautics and Space Administration	NNX14AD31G
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Office of Science	MSCA-IF 2015
U.S. Forest Service
University of New Hampshire
New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory	705432
Northeastern States Research Cooperative	14-DG-11242307- 142

Keywords

climate extremes
drought
ecological thresholds
savannas
shrublands
woodlands

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1111/2041-210X.13094

Cite this

Asbjornsen, H., Campbell, J. L., Jennings, K. A., Vadeboncoeur, M. A., McIntire, C., Templer, P. H., Phillips, R. P., Bauerle, T. L., Dietze, M. C., Frey, S. D., Groffman, P. M., Guerrieri, R., Hanson, P. J., Kelsey, E. P., Knapp, A. K., McDowell, N. G., Meir, P., Novick, K. A., Ollinger, S. V., ... Rustad, L. E. (2018). Guidelines and considerations for designing field experiments simulating precipitation extremes in forest ecosystems. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(12), 2310-2325. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13094

@article{50e74de5c3464ed68f04906eff926fcc,

title = "Guidelines and considerations for designing field experiments simulating precipitation extremes in forest ecosystems",

abstract = "Precipitation regimes are changing in response to climate change, yet understanding of how forest ecosystems respond to extreme droughts and pluvials remains incomplete. As future precipitation extremes will likely fall outside the range of historical variability, precipitation manipulation experiments (PMEs) are critical to advancing knowledge about potential ecosystem responses. However, few PMEs have been conducted in forests compared to short-statured ecosystems, and forest PMEs have unique design requirements and constraints. Moreover, past forest PMEs have lacked coordination, limiting cross-site comparisons. Here, we review and synthesize approaches, challenges, and opportunities for conducting PMEs in forests, with the goal of guiding design decisions, while maximizing the potential for coordination. We reviewed 63 forest PMEs at 70 sites world-wide. Workshops, meetings, and communications with experimentalists were used to generate and build consensus around approaches for addressing the key challenges and enhancing coordination. Past forest PMEs employed a variety of study designs related to treatment level, replication, plot and infrastructure characteristics, and measurement approaches. Important considerations for establishing new forest PMEs include: selecting appropriate treatment levels to reach ecological thresholds; balancing cost, logistical complexity, and effectiveness in infrastructure design; and preventing unintended water subsidies. Response variables in forest PMEs were organized into three broad tiers reflecting increasing complexity and resource intensiveness, with the first tier representing a recommended core set of common measurements. Differences in site conditions combined with unique research questions of experimentalists necessitate careful adaptation of guidelines for forest PMEs to balance local objectives with coordination among experiments. We advocate adoption of a common framework for coordinating forest PME design to enhance cross-site comparability and advance fundamental knowledge about the response and sensitivity of diverse forest ecosystems to precipitation extremes.",

keywords = "climate extremes, drought, ecological thresholds, savannas, shrublands, woodlands",

author = "Heidi Asbjornsen and Campbell, {John L.} and Jennings, {Katie A.} and Vadeboncoeur, {Matthew A.} and Cameron McIntire and Templer, {Pamela H.} and Phillips, {Richard P.} and Bauerle, {Taryn L.} and Dietze, {Michael C.} and Frey, {Serita D.} and Groffman, {Peter M.} and Rosella Guerrieri and Hanson, {Paul J.} and Kelsey, {Eric P.} and Knapp, {Alan K.} and McDowell, {Nathan G.} and Patrick Meir and Novick, {Kimberly A.} and Ollinger, {Scott V.} and Pockman, {Will T.} and Schaberg, {Paul G.} and Wullschleger, {Stan D.} and Smith, {Melinda D.} and Rustad, {Lindsey E.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2018 The Authors. Methods in Ecology and Evolution {\textcopyright} 2018 British Ecological Society",

year = "2018",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1111/2041-210X.13094",

language = "English",

volume = "9",

pages = "2310--2325",

journal = "Methods in Ecology and Evolution",

issn = "2041-210X",

publisher = "Wiley Open Access",

number = "12",

}

Asbjornsen, H, Campbell, JL, Jennings, KA, Vadeboncoeur, MA, McIntire, C, Templer, PH, Phillips, RP, Bauerle, TL, Dietze, MC, Frey, SD, Groffman, PM, Guerrieri, R, Hanson, PJ, Kelsey, EP, Knapp, AK, McDowell, NG, Meir, P, Novick, KA, Ollinger, SV, Pockman, WT, Schaberg, PG, Wullschleger, SD, Smith, MD & Rustad, LE 2018, 'Guidelines and considerations for designing field experiments simulating precipitation extremes in forest ecosystems', Methods in Ecology and Evolution, vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 2310-2325. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13094

TY - JOUR

T1 - Guidelines and considerations for designing field experiments simulating precipitation extremes in forest ecosystems

AU - Asbjornsen, Heidi

AU - Campbell, John L.

AU - Jennings, Katie A.

AU - Vadeboncoeur, Matthew A.

AU - McIntire, Cameron

AU - Templer, Pamela H.

AU - Phillips, Richard P.

AU - Bauerle, Taryn L.

AU - Dietze, Michael C.

AU - Frey, Serita D.

AU - Groffman, Peter M.

AU - Guerrieri, Rosella

AU - Hanson, Paul J.

AU - Kelsey, Eric P.

AU - Knapp, Alan K.

AU - McDowell, Nathan G.

AU - Meir, Patrick

AU - Novick, Kimberly A.

AU - Ollinger, Scott V.

AU - Pockman, Will T.

AU - Schaberg, Paul G.

AU - Wullschleger, Stan D.

AU - Smith, Melinda D.

AU - Rustad, Lindsey E.

PY - 2018/12

Y1 - 2018/12

N2 - Precipitation regimes are changing in response to climate change, yet understanding of how forest ecosystems respond to extreme droughts and pluvials remains incomplete. As future precipitation extremes will likely fall outside the range of historical variability, precipitation manipulation experiments (PMEs) are critical to advancing knowledge about potential ecosystem responses. However, few PMEs have been conducted in forests compared to short-statured ecosystems, and forest PMEs have unique design requirements and constraints. Moreover, past forest PMEs have lacked coordination, limiting cross-site comparisons. Here, we review and synthesize approaches, challenges, and opportunities for conducting PMEs in forests, with the goal of guiding design decisions, while maximizing the potential for coordination. We reviewed 63 forest PMEs at 70 sites world-wide. Workshops, meetings, and communications with experimentalists were used to generate and build consensus around approaches for addressing the key challenges and enhancing coordination. Past forest PMEs employed a variety of study designs related to treatment level, replication, plot and infrastructure characteristics, and measurement approaches. Important considerations for establishing new forest PMEs include: selecting appropriate treatment levels to reach ecological thresholds; balancing cost, logistical complexity, and effectiveness in infrastructure design; and preventing unintended water subsidies. Response variables in forest PMEs were organized into three broad tiers reflecting increasing complexity and resource intensiveness, with the first tier representing a recommended core set of common measurements. Differences in site conditions combined with unique research questions of experimentalists necessitate careful adaptation of guidelines for forest PMEs to balance local objectives with coordination among experiments. We advocate adoption of a common framework for coordinating forest PME design to enhance cross-site comparability and advance fundamental knowledge about the response and sensitivity of diverse forest ecosystems to precipitation extremes.

AB - Precipitation regimes are changing in response to climate change, yet understanding of how forest ecosystems respond to extreme droughts and pluvials remains incomplete. As future precipitation extremes will likely fall outside the range of historical variability, precipitation manipulation experiments (PMEs) are critical to advancing knowledge about potential ecosystem responses. However, few PMEs have been conducted in forests compared to short-statured ecosystems, and forest PMEs have unique design requirements and constraints. Moreover, past forest PMEs have lacked coordination, limiting cross-site comparisons. Here, we review and synthesize approaches, challenges, and opportunities for conducting PMEs in forests, with the goal of guiding design decisions, while maximizing the potential for coordination. We reviewed 63 forest PMEs at 70 sites world-wide. Workshops, meetings, and communications with experimentalists were used to generate and build consensus around approaches for addressing the key challenges and enhancing coordination. Past forest PMEs employed a variety of study designs related to treatment level, replication, plot and infrastructure characteristics, and measurement approaches. Important considerations for establishing new forest PMEs include: selecting appropriate treatment levels to reach ecological thresholds; balancing cost, logistical complexity, and effectiveness in infrastructure design; and preventing unintended water subsidies. Response variables in forest PMEs were organized into three broad tiers reflecting increasing complexity and resource intensiveness, with the first tier representing a recommended core set of common measurements. Differences in site conditions combined with unique research questions of experimentalists necessitate careful adaptation of guidelines for forest PMEs to balance local objectives with coordination among experiments. We advocate adoption of a common framework for coordinating forest PME design to enhance cross-site comparability and advance fundamental knowledge about the response and sensitivity of diverse forest ecosystems to precipitation extremes.

KW - climate extremes

KW - drought

KW - ecological thresholds

KW - savannas

KW - shrublands

KW - woodlands

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055527025&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/2041-210X.13094

DO - 10.1111/2041-210X.13094

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85055527025

SN - 2041-210X

VL - 9

SP - 2310

EP - 2325

JO - Methods in Ecology and Evolution

JF - Methods in Ecology and Evolution

IS - 12

ER -

Guidelines and considerations for designing field experiments simulating precipitation extremes in forest ecosystems

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this