IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0189468.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which climate change path are we following? Bad news from Scots pine

Author

Listed:
  • Pierluigi Bombi
  • Ettore D’Andrea
  • Negar Rezaie
  • Mario Cammarano
  • Giorgio Matteucci

Abstract

Current expectations on future climate derive from coordinated experiments, which compile many climate models for sampling the entire uncertainty related to emission scenarios, initial conditions, and modelling process. Quantifying this uncertainty is important for taking decisions that are robust under a wide range of possible future conditions. Nevertheless, if uncertainty is too large, it can prevent from planning specific and effective measures. For this reason, reducing the spectrum of the possible scenarios to a small number of one or a few models that actually represent the climate pathway influencing natural ecosystems would substantially increase our planning capacity. Here we adopt a multidisciplinary approach based on the comparison of observed and expected spatial patterns of response to climate change in order to identify which specific models, among those included in the CMIP5, catch the real climate variation driving the response of natural ecosystems. We used dendrochronological analyses for determining the geographic pattern of recent growth trends for three European species of trees. At the same time, we modelled the climatic niche for the same species and forecasted the suitability variation expected across Europe under each different GCM. Finally, we estimated how well each GCM explains the real response of ecosystems, by comparing the expected variation with the observed growth trends. Doing this, we identified four climatic models that are coherent with the observed trends. These models are close to the highest range limit of the climatic variations expected by the ensemble of the CMIP5 models, suggesting that current predictions of climate change impacts on ecosystems could be underestimated.

Suggested Citation

  • Pierluigi Bombi & Ettore D’Andrea & Negar Rezaie & Mario Cammarano & Giorgio Matteucci, 2017. "Which climate change path are we following? Bad news from Scots pine," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0189468
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189468
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0189468
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0189468&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0189468?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0189468. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.