RE:
SOOOPA! Winter Temps and Snow Cover |
Neil
Pederson |
Jan
25, 2005 15:27 PST |
Bob, Lee, ENTS:
I like the snow cover idea and its relationship as a factor of
tree
growth. the first paper of my dissertation was published in
which I
drew up a hypothesis on just this subject.
I found that the radial growth of the
oak-hickory forest [driven
mostly by white oak and chestnut oak] are more sensitive to
January
temperatures in the southern half of the Hudson Valley than in
the
foothills of the Adirondack and Taconic Mountains. This
completely
contradicted what I was expecting. As Lee suggests, I
hypothesize
that the ephemeral snow cover in the lower half of the Hudson
Valley
subjects the soil to increased freezing compared to the
Adirondack
and Taconic Mountains. Soil temperatures just below freezing
have
been shown to significantly increase fine root mortality in the
White
Mountains of NH.
Of course, my Hudson Valley hypothesis needs testing.
If anyone is interested in this paper, I can send along a PDF of
it.
Pederson, N., E.R. Cook, G.C. Jacoby, D.M. Peteet, and K.L.
Griffin.
2004. The influence of winter temperatures on the annual radial
growth of six northern-range-margin tree species.
Dendrochronologia
22: 7-29.
Neil
|
Neil's
hypothesis |
Robert
Leverett |
Jan
27, 2005 06:56 PST |
Neil:
Thanks for providing us with your insight into the impact of
ground
freezing on root mortality. I wonder what the primary factors
are
affecting growth potential of tuliptrees in the Hudson River
Valley and
tributaries as opposed to the Connecticut River Valley and
tributaries.
Something changes significantly from Hyde Park to Northampton,
but
darned if I can figure what it is. It doesn't seem to be
climate.
Location Month Avg
Temp Extreme Low/high
Northampton Jan 22 -30
Hyde Park Jan 24.5 -30
Northampton Jul 71 100
Hyde Park Jul 72 103
Location Annual
Precipitation
Hyde Park 44.12
Northampton 45.56
Bob
|
Re:
Neil's hypothesis |
Neil
Pederson |
Jan
27, 2005 07:49 PST |
Bob,
This is the thing about the research in the Hudson Valley that
surprised me. I expected that as we sampled closer to a northern
range margin, especially in the ADK and Taconic Mountains, that
the
trees would be more responsive to air temperatures.
What we found with the oak-hickory trees [again, white and
chestnut
oak were the most sensitive] was just the opposite. Winter
temperatures significantly limited tree growth in the lower
Hudson
Valley, from at least Montgomery Place south, where winters are
milder and growing seasons are longer. North of Albany, where
climate
is generally colder and the growing season is shorter, these
same
species had no significant relationship to winter temperatures.
Why is tree growth of these species more limited by winter
temperatures compared to trees of the same species living in or
close
to forests with spruce?? My best guess right now is that it is a
snow
gradient from NYC to the ADK and Taconic Mountains is driving
this
winter temperature sensitivity. The lack of snow cover down here
lowers soil temperatures, which leads to increased root
mortality.
This gradient will not show up in standard climatic statistics.
This
is why research is so important. It can reveal unexpected
results to
inform us that there is so much to learn about tree growth and
survival! I'm guessing we aren't asking the correct questions
yet.
Neil
|
Re:
Neil's hypothesis |
Lee
E. Frelich |
Jan
27, 2005 08:04 PST |
Bob and Neil:
I think you are right about soil freezing impacts on trees. we
have a large
die off in oaks in central Minnesota in the last two years, and
we also had
periods of below zero weather with no snow in the last two
winters. Frost
depths reached 8 feet in some places, and 10 cm soil
temperatures reached
as low as 7 degrees.
Of course we also had a fall drought during 2003, and that
probably added
to the impact.
Lee
|
RE:
Neil's hypothesis |
Robert
Leverett |
Jan
27, 2005 08:10 PST |
Neil:
I hear you and understand your points. I
wonder how oaks behave in
the lower Hudson River Valley relative to the Connecticut River
Valley
around the latitude of Northampton. Any thoughts? What would you
have
expected for tuliptrees?
Bob
|
Re:
Neil's hypothesis |
Lee
E. Frelich |
Jan
27, 2005 08:12 PST |
Neil:
Most agricultural experiment stations record soil temperatures
on a weekly
basis throughout the year. Have you been able to use those data
in your
tree-ring analyses?
Lee
|
RE:
Neil's hypothesis |
Neil
Pederson |
Jan
27, 2005 09:54 PST |
Bob,
I am not as familiar with the area around Northampton. I would
guess
that there could be a similar gradient in snowpack. Having
driven up
rt 32 from Palmer [I-90] to the Harvard Forest during different
seasons, I have a strong memory of a gradient similar to the one
in
the northern end of the Hudson Valley [from roughly Albany
north].
Having said that, my few data points in MA appear to not fall in
line with the HV hypothesis. The Mohawk Trail State Forest red
oak
are very sensitive to winter temps for the species in the NE,
but the
Harvard Forest red oak are not. The discrepancy with the HV
hypothesis may be species related, however. Red oak, in my
limited
study, is much less sensitive to temperature than white or
chestnut
oak. So, maybe the hypothesis survives?! I'll know more about
red oak
in just over a month from now.
Not sure what to say about tuliptrees. I have not found a stand
sufficient for sampling in the Hudson Valley north of Montgomery
Place to form a good idea about the response to a large
gradient.
I've only found some scattered, young tuliptrees in Washington
CO.,
NY. The populations in N NJ and mid-HV have winter temperature
sensitivity that are somewhat different than the oaks. This
research
will have to wait until after I finish my dissertation this
spring.
Neil
|
Re:
Neil's hypothesis |
Neil
Pederson |
Jan
27, 2005 09:55 PST |
Lee,
I have looked at soil temperature data, it is now available
online.
Soil temp data is limited in the Hudson River Valley, esp. for
depths
greater than 20 cm. We expected to see greater sensitivity of
the
trees to soil temperatures. Surprisingly, the differences in
sensitivity to soil temperatures at 20 cm versus air
temperatures are
negligible for the one ag station we were able to test.
The best soil temperature records [greater depths, longer
records,
fewer missing values] are in the midwest, which makes sense
considering the location of our current bread basket.
Neil
|
|