Assessing forest vulnerability and the potential distribution of pine beetles under current and future climate scenarios in the Interior West of the US

Forest Ecology and Management

Volumn 262, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 307-316

  Evangelista, Paul H ^a   Kumar, Sunil ^a   Stohlgren, Thomas J ^b   Young, Nicholas E ^a  

^a Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability   (United States)

^b FORT COLLINS SCIENCE CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Bark beetles; Bioclim; Climate change; Maxent; Niche models; Rocky mountains

Indexed keywords

BARK BEETLE; BIOCLIM; MAXENT; NICHE MODELS; ROCKY MOUNTAINS;

CLIMATE CHANGE; ECOSYSTEMS; FORECASTING; FORESTRY; LANDFORMS; SURVEYS;

CLIMATE MODELS;

ASSESSMENT METHOD; BEETLE; CLIMATE CHANGE; CLIMATE CONDITIONS; CLIMATE MODELING; CONIFEROUS TREE; DATABASE; FOREST ECOSYSTEM; HABITAT TYPE; PEST SPECIES; PLANT-HERBIVORE INTERACTION; POLYGON; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; STABILIZATION; SURVEY; VULNERABILITY;

BIODIVERSITY; DATA BASES; ECOSYSTEMS; EMISSION; FORESTS; INSECTS; METEOROLOGY; MOUNTAINS; SURVEYS; WESTERN USA;

ROCKY MOUNTAINS;

COLEOPTERA; CURCULIONIDAE; DENDROCTONUS BREVICOMIS; DENDROCTONUS PONDEROSAE; IPS PINI; PINUS MUGO; SCOLYTINAE;

EID: 79958074803     PISSN: 03781127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2011.03.036     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Adams A.S., Six D.L., Adams S.M., Holben W.E. In vitro interactions between yeasts and bacteria and the fungal symbionts of the mountain pine beetle. Microb. Ecol. 2008, 56:60-466.
2. Amman G.D. Population changes of the mountain pine beetle in relation to elevation. Environ. Entomol. 1973, 2:541-547.
3. Anderbrant O. Reemergence and second brood in the bark beetle Ips typographus. Holarctic Ecol. 1989, 12:494-500.
4. Anderson N.H., Anderson D.B. Ips bark beetle attacks and brood development on a lightning-struck pine in relation to its physiological decline. Florida Entomol. 1968, 51:23-30.
5. Aukema B.H., Clayton M.K., Raffa K.F. Modeling flight activity and population dynamics of the pine engraver, Ips pini, in the Great Lakes region; effects of weather and predators over short time scales. Popul. Ecol. 2005, 47:61-69.
6. Beaumont L.J., Pitman A.J., Poulsen M., Hughes L. Where will species go? Incorporating new advances in climate modelling into projections of species distributions. Global Change Bio. 2007, 13:1368-1385.
7. Berg E.E., Henry J.D., Fastie C.L., DeVolder A.D., Matsuoka S.M. Spruce beetle outbreaks on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, and Kluane National Park and Reserve, Yukon Territory: Relationship to summer temperatures and regional differences in disturbance regimes. For. Ecol. Manage. 2006, 227:219-232.
8. Berryman A.A. Resistance of confers to invasion by bark beetle-fungus associations. Biosci. 1972, 22:598-602.
9. Berryman A.A., Stenseth N.C., Isaev A.S. Natural regulation of herbivorous forest insect populations. Oecologia 1987, 71:174-184.
10. Bleiker K.P., Potter S.E., Lauzon C.R., Six D.L. Transport of fungal symbionts by mountain pine beetles. Can. Entomol. 2009, 141:503-514.
11. Boubli J.P., de Lima M.G. Modeling the geographical distribution and fundamental niches of Cacajao spp. And Chiropotes israelita in Northwestern Amazonia via a maximum entropy algorithm. Inter. J. Primatol. 2009, 30:217-228.
12. Breece C.R., Kolb T.E., Dickson B.G., McMillin J.D., Clancy K.M. Prescribed fire effects on bark beetle activity and tree mortality in southwestern ponderosa pine forest. For. Ecol. Manage. 2008, 255:119-128.
13. Carrol, A.L., Safranyik, L., 2004. The bionomics of the mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine forests: establishing a context. In: T.L. Shore, J.E. Brooks and J.E. Stone (Eds.), Mountain Pine Beetle Symposium: Challenges and Solutions, October 30-31, 2003, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. Pp. 223-232. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry Centre, Victoria, British Columbia. Information Report BC-X-399, p. 298.
14. Carroll, A.L., Taylor, S.W., Regniere J., Safranyik L., 2004. Effects of climate change on range expansion by the mountain pine beetle in British Columbia, in: T.L. Shore, J.E. Brooks and J.E. Stone (Eds.), Mountain Pine Beetle Symposium: Challenges and Solutions, October 30-31, 2003, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada. pp. 223-232. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry Centre, Victoria, British Columbia. Information Report BC-X-399. 298p.
15. Colorado State Forest Service, Colorado Department of Natural Resources The Health of Colorado's Forests, Special Issue: Threats to Colorado's Current and Future Forest Resources 2009, Denver, CO, p. 40.
16. Evangelista P.H., Norman J., Berhanu L., Kumar S., Alley N. Predicting habitat suitability for the endemic mountain nyala (Tragelaphus buxtoni) in Ethiopia. Wildl. Res. 2008, 35:409-416.
17. Fettig C.J., Borys R.R., McKelvey S.R., Dabney C.P. Blacks mountain experimental forest: bark beetle responses to differences in forest structure and the application of prescribed fire in interior ponderosa pine. Can. J. For. Res. 2008, 38:924-935.
18. Fleming R.A., Candau J.N., McAlpine R.S. Landscape-scale analysis of interactions between insect defoliation and forest fire in Central Canada. Climate Change 2002, 55:145-170.
19. Hayes C.J., DeGomez T.E., McMillin J.D., Anhold J.A., Hofstetter R.W. Factors influencing pine engraver (Ips pini Say) colonization of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl Ex. Laws.) slash in Northern Arizona. For. Ecol. Manage. 2008, 255:3541-3548.
20. Heikkinen R.K., Miska L., Araujo M.B., Virkkala R., Thuiller W., Sykes M.T. Methods and uncertainties in bioclimatic envelope modelling under climate change. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 2006, 30:751-777.
21. Hicke J.A., Logan J.A., Powell J., Ojima D.S. Changing temperatures influence suitability for modeled mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) outbreaks in the western United States. J. Geophys. Res. 2006, 111:1-12.
22. Hijmans R.J., Graham C.H. The ability of climate envelope models to predict the effect of climate change on species distributions. Global Change Biol. 2006, 12:2272-2281.
23. Hijmans R.J., Cameron S.E., Parra J.L., Jones P.G., Jarvis A. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Clim. 2005, 25:1965-1978.
24. Hijmans, R.J., Cameron, S.E., Parra, J.L., 2006. WorldClim Global Climate Layers Version 1.4, available from WorldClim Database: http://www.worldclim.org.
25. Holt A.C., Salkeld D.J., Fritz C.L., Tucker J.R., Gong P. Spatial analysis of plague in California: niche modeling predictions of the current distribution and potential response to climate change. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2009, 8:1-14.
26. Jarnevich C.S., Stohlgren T.J. Near term climate projections for invasive species distributions. Biol. Invasions 2009, 11:1373-1379.
27. Jonsson A.M., Appelberg G., Harding S., Barring L. Spatio-temporal impact of climate change on the activity and voltinism of the spruce bark beetle, Ips typographus. Glob. Change Biol. 2009, 15:486-499.
28. Kalkstein L.S. Effects of climatic stress upon outbreaks of southern pine beetle. Environ. Entomol. 1976, 5:653-658.
29. Kegeley, S., Livingston R., Gibson, K., 1997. Pine engraver, Ips pini (say), in the western United States. USDA Forest Insect and Disease Leaflet 122.
30. Klepzig K.D., Raffa K.F., Smalley E.B. Association of insect-fungal complexes with red pine decline in Wisconsin. For. Sci. 1991, 37:1119-1139.
31. Klepzig K.D., Moser J.C., Lombardero F.J., Hofstetter R.W., Ayres M.P. Symbiosis and competition: complex interactions among beetles, fungus and mites. Symbiosis 2001, 30:83-96.
32. Kumar S., Stohlgren T.J. Maxent modeling for predicting suitable habitat for threatened and endangered tree Canacomyrica monticola in New Caledonia. J. Ecol. Nat. Environ. 2009, 1:94-98.
33. Kumar S., Spaulding S.A., Stohlgren T.J., Hermann K.A., Schmidt T.S., Bahls L.L. Potential habitat distribution for the freshwater diatom Didymosphenia geminata in the continental US. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7:415-420.
34. Kurz W.A., Dymond C.C., Stinson G., Rampley G.J., Neilson E.T., Carroll A.L., Ebata T., Safranyik L. Mountain pine beetle and forest carbon feedback to climate change. Nature 2008, 452:987-990.
35. Larsson S., Oren R., Waring R.H., Barrett J.W. Attacks of mountain pine beetle as related to tree vigor of ponderosa pine. For. Sci. 1983, 29:395-402.
36. Leatherman, D., Aguayo, I., Mehall, T., 1999. Mountain Pine Beetle. Insect Series no.5.528. Colorado State University extension and Colorado State Forest Service.
37. Logan J.A., Regniere J., Powell J.A. Assessing the impacts of global warming on forest pest dynamics. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2003, 1:130-137.
38. Malmstrom C.M., Raffa K.F. Biotic disturbance agents in the boreal forest: considerations for vegetation change models. Global Change Biol. 2000, 6:35-48.
39. Mattson W., Haack R. The role of drought in outbreaks of plant-eating insects. Biosci. 1987, 37:110-118.
40. McHugh C.W., Kolb T.J., Wilson J.L. Bark beetle attacks on ponderosa pine following fire in northern Arizona. Environ. Entomol. 2003, 32:510-512.
41. Ministry of Forests, 2005. 2004 aerial overview survey estimates, report. Government of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
42. NatureServe International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications 2009, NatureServe Central Databases, Arlington, VA, USA Data current as of 17 July 2009.
43. Negron J.F., McMillin J.D., Anhold J.A., Coulson D. Bark beetle-caused mortality in a drought-affected ponderosa pine landscape in Arizona. USA For. Ecol. Manage. 2009, 257:1353-1362.
44. Oliver, W.W., 1995. Is self-thinning in ponderosa pine ruled by Dendroctonus bark beetles? In: L.G. Eskew, comp. Forest health through silviculture: proceedings of the 1995 National Silviculture Workshop, Mescalero, New Mexico, May 8-11, 1995. General Technical Report.
45. Pearson R.G., Dawson T.P. Predicting impacts of climate change on distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful?. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 2003, 12:361-371.
46. Pearson R.G., Dawson T.P., Liu C. Modelling species distributions in Britain: a hierarchical integration of climate and land-cover data. Ecography 2004, 27:285-298.
47. Peterson A.T., Nakazawa Y. Environmental data sets matter in ecological niche modelling: an example with Solenopsis invicta and Solenopsis richteri. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 2007, 17:135-144.
48. Phillips S.J., Dudik M., Schapire R.E. A maximum entropy approach to species distribution modeling. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Machine Learning 2004, 655-662. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA.
49. Phillips S.J., Anderson R.P., Schapire R.E. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol. Model. 2006, 190:231-259.
50. Raffa K.F., Berryman A.A. Interacting selective pressures in conifer-bark beetle systems: a basis for reciprocal adaptations. Am. Nat. 1987, 129:234-262.
51. Raffa K.F., Aukema B.H., Bentz B.J., Carroll A.L., Hicke J.A., Turner M., Romme W.H. Cross-scale drivers of natural disturbances prone to anthropogenic amplification: the dynamics of bark beetle eruptions. BioSci. 2008, 58:501-517.
52. Reid M.L., Robb T. Death of vigorous trees benefits bark beetles. Oecologia 1999, 120:555-562.
53. Roberston C., Nelson T.A., Jelinski D.E., Wulder M.A., Boots B. Spatial-temporal analysis of species range expansion: the case of the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae. J. Biogeogr. 2009, 36:1446-1458.
54. Rollins M.G. LANDFIRE: a nationally consistent vegetation, wildland fire, and fuel assessment. Int. J. Wldlnd Fire. 2009, 18:235-249.
55. Rudinsky J.A. Ecology of Scolytidae. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 1962, 7:327-348.
56. Sanchez-Martinez G., Wagner M.R. Bark beetle community structure under four ponderosa pine forest stand conditions in northern Arizona. For. Ecol. Manage. 2002, 170:145-160.
57. Schlyter F., Anderbrant O. Competition and niche separation between two bark beetles: existence and mechanisms. Oikos 1993, 68:437-447.
58. Sinclair S.J., White M.D., Newell G.R. How useful are species distribution models for managing biodiversity under future climate?. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15:8.
59. Smith R.H. Toxicity of pine resin vapors to three species of Dendroctonus bark beetles. J. Econ. Entomol. 1963, 56:827-831.
60. Smith R. Direct control of western pine beetle (Dendroctonus brevicomis LeConte): Review and assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-121 1990, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, US Department of Agriculture, Berkeley, CA.
61. Smith W.H. Ice and forest health. North. J. App. For. 2000, 17:16-19.
62. Thomson A.J. Climate indices and mountain pine beetle-killing temperatures. For. Chronol. 2009, 85:105-109.
63. USDA, 2009. , http://www.fs.fed.us/r1-r4/spf/fhp/aerial/gisdata.html.
64. VanDerWal J., Shoo L.P., Graham C., William S.E. Selecting pseudo-absence data for presence-only distribution modeling: how far should you stray from what you know?. Ecol. Model. 2009, 220:589-594.
65. Veloz S.D. Spatially autocorrelated sampling falsely inflates measures of accuracy for presence-only niche models. J. Biogeogr. 2009, 36:2290-2299.
66. Waring R.H., Pitman G.B. Modifying lodgepole pine stands to change susceptibility to mountain pine beetle attack. Ecol. 1985, 66:889-897.
67. Western Forestry Leadership Coalition (WFLC), 2009. Western bark beetle assessment: A framework for cooperative forest stewardship. http://www.wflccenter.org/news_pdf/325_pdf.pdf.
68. Westfall, J., 2006. 2005 Summary of Forest Health Conditions in British Columbia, British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range, Forest Practices Branch, Victoria, BC, Pest Management Report Number 15, pp. 50.
69. Westfall J. Summary of forest health conditions in British Columbia, British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range 2007, Forest Practices Branch, Victoria, Canada.