Upload
victoria-wells
View
213
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Effects of landscape connectivity on ecosystem adaptation to climate
change in Central America
Bruno Locatelli, CIRAD-CIFOR, Indonesia
Pablo Imbach, CATIE, Costa Rica
EuropeAid/ENV/2004-81719
Seminar series on climate change and forest management, BC Ministry of Forests and Range Future Forest Ecosystem Initiative.November 6, 2008. Teleconference between Canada and Costa Rica
2
Climate change and ecosystem migration
• CC modifies location of suitable environments for plants (Hannah et al., 2002)
• Future distribution of ecosystems depends on the ability of plants to migrate (Pitelka et al., 1997; Kirilenko et al., 2000)
– High migration rates (>1000 m/yr) required to adapt to CC (Malcolm et al., 2002)
• Many studies on CC and ecosystems consider unlimited dispersal or no dispersal (Pearson, 2006)
• Uncertainties on migration rates of trees:– During post-glacial warming
• 100’s to 1000’s m/yr(Pearson 2006, Malcolm et al., 2002),
• less than 100 m/yr (McLachlan et al., 2005)
– Models of current migration• Around 100 m/yr (Dyer, 1995)
3
Biological corridors and protected areas
• Landscape alteration may reducemigration capacity (Pitelka, 1997)
– Altering dispersal rate– Reducing suitable habitat for successful colonization
• Corridors can enhance landscape connectivity between valuable vegetation areas (e.g. protected areas)
• Their role in migration under CC depends on spatial patterns
• Latitudinal and altitudinal gradients– Is it so simple?
ProtectedArea
Corridor
Direction of species movement due to CC
4
Can corridors facilitate ecosystem migration between protected areas in a context of CC?
Case of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridorin Costa Rica
5
Costa RicaPanama
NicaraguaHonduras
El SalvadorGuatemala
BelizeMexico
Study site
• Costa Rica– Biological richness & conservation policies– “Increasing isolation of protected areas may
prevent them from functioning as an effective network” (Sánchez-Azofeifa et al., 2003)
(CCAD-UNDP/GEF, 2002)
Protected Areas
Biological Corridors
• The Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (MBC)
– Regional initiative – Conceptualized and agreedupon in 1997– Under progressive implementation
6
Protected Areas
Mesoamerican corridor
Pacific Ocean
Caribbean Sea
Nicaragua
Panama
Costa Rica
N
7
Approach and model assumptions (1/2)
• Simple representation of vegetation– Model ≠ evolution of vegetation
– Model = landscape connectivity
– Vegetation types =Holdridge life zones
– Each vegetation type is composed of 5 groups of species with different migration rates
• From slow (100 m/yr) to fast-moving (2000 m/yr)
Holdridge
• Cellular Automata
8
Model assumptions (2/2)
• Migration is possible through contiguous pixels with vegetation
• 4 scenarios– No migration– Migration
• With vegetation only in protected areas
• With vegetation in protected areas and corridors
• With vegetation everywhere (“Eden”)
9
Algorithm
Controller Pixel px Species spft,lz
Estimate 1990 Life Zone (lz1990)
Create baseline presence:presence(px,spft,lz1990)=1
Initialize
RunEstimate Current
Life Zone (lzcurrent ) sp adapted to lzcurrent? No: presence:=presence/2
Yes: sp already present in px?Yes: presence:=presence*2
(with upper bounddue to carrying capacity)
No: sp in neighbourhood? (radius=migration(ft))
Yes: presence:=0.25No: presence:=0
Updateindicators
Next decade
10
Data• Scales
– Spatial = 2.5 arc min (around 4.6 km x 4.6 km)
– Temporal = Decades, from 1990 to 2050
Nicaragua
Costa Rica
PanamaPacific Ocean
Caribbean Sea
Nicaragua
Costa Rica
Panama
Pacific Ocean
Caribbean Sea
Protected AreasBiological Corridors
• Climate and altitude– WorldClim dataset (Hijmans et al., 2005):
• Altitude, Monthly Precipitation and Temperature
– Current and future • IPCC scenario A2• HadCM3 climate model
• Protected Areas and Biological Corridors– CCAD map, 2001
11
Results and discussion
Life zonemovement
86°W 81.5°W
12°N
8°N
12
High impacts
Low impacts
Pacific Ocean
Caribbean Sea
Nicaragua
Panama
N
Protected areas most sensitive to CC(no migration scenario)
13
Protected areas under different migration scenarios
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Years
Ve
ge
tatio
n In
de
x (R
ela
tive
to E
de
n S
cen
ario
) Evolution of Vegetation in Protected Areas
Protected areas and corridorsProtected areas onlyNo migration
Effect of corridors
14
Which protected areas benefit morefrom corridors?
15
Which corridors contribute moreto the adaptation of protected areas?
16
How to explain these results?
Direction of Life Zone Movement
Corridors and Areas not evaluated
Important corridors
(connecting isolated and vulnerable areas, in a
good direction)
Missing corridors?
Already connected protected areas
17
Conclusion• Sensitivity of protected areas to CC
– Especially isolated areas and in mountain and dry zones
• Role of corridors for reducing vulnerability
• Useful tool for:– Identifying vulnerable protected areas– Prioritizing corridors in a context of CC
• Further steps:– Consider actual vegetation outside protected
areas and corridors– Use different climate scenarios– Use different representations of ecosystem
dynamics and migration– Perform sensitivity analysis
18
Thank you!