Posted on 07/02/2012 11:49:58 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Umbrella Thorn Acacia, Lake Nakuru National Park, Kenya
by Adam Jones – click to order a photo or poster
I’ve covered this before, such as when NASA posted satellite data showing that the biosphere is booming thanks to CO2 fertilization. This new study from Goethe University in Frankfurt, Germany suggests that the Umbrella Thorn Acacia trees will make a comeback.
Tree trumps grass to rule the savannas
A new study published today in “Nature” by authors from the Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre and the Goethe University Frankfurt suggests that large parts of Africa’s savannas may well be forests by 2100. The study suggests that fertilization by atmospheric carbon dioxide is forcing increases in tree cover throughout Africa. A switch from savanna to forest occurs once a critical threshold of CO2 concentration is exceeded, yet each site has its own critical threshold. The implication is that each savanna will switch at different points in time, thereby reducing the risk that a synchronous shock to the earth system will emanate from savannas.
Tropical grasslands, savannas and forests, areas the authors call the savanna complex, are expected to respond sensitively to climate and atmospheric changes. This is because the main players, grasses and trees, differ fundamentally in their response to temperature, carbon dioxide supply and fire and are in an unrelenting struggle for the dominance of the savanna complex. The outcome of this struggle determines whether vast portions of the globe’s tropical and sub-tropical regions are covered with grasslands, savannas or forests. In the past such shifts in dominance have played out in slow motion, but the current wave of atmospheric changes has accelerated the potential rate of change.
Experimental studies have generally shown that plants do not show a large response to CO2 fertilization. “However, most of these studies were conducted in northern ecosystems or on commercially important species” explains Steven Higgins, lead author of the study from the Biodiodversity and Climate Reseach Centre and Goethe-University. “In fact, only one experimental study has investigated how savanna plants will respond to changing CO2 concentrations and this study showed that savanna trees were essentially CO2 starved under pre-industrial CO2 concentrations, and that their growth really starts taking off at the CO2 concentrations we are currently experiencing.“
The vegetation shifts that the Higgins and Scheiter study projects are an example of what some theorists call catastrophic regime shifts. Such catastrophic regime shifts can be triggered by small changes in the factors that regulate the system. These small changes set up a cascade of events that reinforce each other causing the system to change more and more rapidly. The study demonstrated that the savanna complex showed symptoms of catastrophic regime shifts. “The potential for regime shifts in a vegetation formation that covers such vast areas is what is making earth system scientists turn their attention to savannas” comments Higgins.
Knowing when such regime shifts will occur is critical for anticipating change. This study discovered that locations where the temperature rise associated with climate change occurs rapidly, for example in the center of southern Africa, are projected to switch later to forest as the high rate of temperature increase allows the savanna grasses to remain competitive for longer in the face of rising atmospheric CO2 concentration. This means that even though a single location may experience its catastrophic regime shift, the vegetation change when averaged over a region will be smoother. Such gradual transitions in regional vegetation patterns will reduce the potential for shocks to the earth system. “While this may seem reassuring, we have to bear in mind that these changes are still rapid when viewed on geological time scales”, says Higgins.
The practical implications of the study are far reaching. For example, the study identified a belt that spans northern central Africa where fire suppression would encourage savannas to transition to forests. “So if you wanted to sequester carbon as part of a carbon mitigation action, this is where you should do it” explained Higgins “with the caveat that where this will work is shifting as atmospheric conditions change.” A worrying implication is that the grasslands and open savannas of Africa, areas with unique floras and faunas, are set to be replaced by closed savannas or forests. Hence it appears that atmospheric change represents a major threat to systems that are already threatened by over-grazing, plantation forestry and crop production.
###
Paper:
Steven I. Higgins and Simon Scheiter (2012). Atmospheric CO2 forces abrupt vegetation shifts locally, but not global. Nature, DOI: 10.1038/nature11238
*****************************************EXCERPT***********************************
eqibno says:
What a dilemma!
More trees due to that evil changing climate…. We can’t have that! We must reduce CO2 so that we keep those lovely grasslands as they are…errr were…errr should be?
My question is: Will the Greens cut down the offending trees in the meantime to give the poor old grass a chance?
They may have to ask industrialists to sustainably harvest the trees (using green methods, of course) to keep the exact number that used to be where they believe it should be….
And NASA just told us that CO2 is a powerful coolant in the upper atmosphere, where it radiates energy from solar flairs back into space, doing what Niels Bohr discovered all those years ago. ...This heat wave may be because we don’t have enough CO2 keeping us cool.
I recommend the site CO2 Science.
Thanks Ernest.
They’ve been telling us for 100 years that human deforestation of Africa was turning it into a desert. And the trees are taking over?
“And the Trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe and saw”
- Rush, The Trees, 2112
I thought the rain forests were a good thing, that they consumed co2.
“They’ve been telling us for 100 years that human deforestation of Africa was turning it into a desert. And the trees are taking over?”
It was during the ice ages that most of Africa was desert, because all the water was frozen in glaciers.
What many people (those who remember their geology & geography from school days) were saying 10 years ago:
“A warmer Earth is a wetter Earth; that’s a GOOD thing, not bad!”
Of the water on Earth, a small percentage was locked up in glaciers. Although all that ice (and whatever caused it), certainly changed the climate.
Its curious as to what caused the Holocene Wet Phase(from about 7500–7000 BC to about 3500–3000 BC), that turned the Sahara green. And just as curious as to what ended it.
My question is: Will the Greens cut down the offending trees in the meantime to give the poor old grass a chance?
i find it interesting that the only places my lawn is a beautiful green is where they get some sort of shade from my trees.
The truth is all the warmists don’t know what will happen if the earth warms appreciably. They all predict disaster, but we know they had an agenda with that forecast. Why would warmer weather cause a huge global disaster given that the earth’s temp has been FIVE TO SIX DEGREES HIGHER!!!! at various times in the past. And we’re still here. We’ve had global temps so high the poles were melted. So if higher temps would have caused a disaster destroying all life as know it, we would have seen evidence of that many times in the global history stretching out billions of years.
Most likely camels driving SUVs.
I think I remember seeing on a documentary that during some of the dinasaur ages, the Sahara was a shallow sea.
This preference for trees is not necessarily a good thing.
Wrong. I was there at the time and Africa was green then.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.