scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Gerd Esser

Other affiliations: University of Osnabrück
Bio: Gerd Esser is an academic researcher from University of Giessen. The author has contributed to research in topics: Biosphere model & Carbon cycle. The author has an hindex of 18, co-authored 28 publications receiving 4030 citations. Previous affiliations of Gerd Esser include University of Osnabrück.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Jens Kattge1, Sandra Díaz2, Sandra Lavorel3, Iain Colin Prentice4, Paul Leadley5, Gerhard Bönisch1, Eric Garnier3, Mark Westoby4, Peter B. Reich6, Peter B. Reich7, Ian J. Wright4, Johannes H. C. Cornelissen8, Cyrille Violle3, Sandy P. Harrison4, P.M. van Bodegom8, Markus Reichstein1, Brian J. Enquist9, Nadejda A. Soudzilovskaia8, David D. Ackerly10, Madhur Anand11, Owen K. Atkin12, Michael Bahn13, Timothy R. Baker14, Dennis D. Baldocchi10, Renée M. Bekker15, Carolina C. Blanco16, Benjamin Blonder9, William J. Bond17, Ross A. Bradstock18, Daniel E. Bunker19, Fernando Casanoves20, Jeannine Cavender-Bares7, Jeffrey Q. Chambers21, F. S. Chapin22, Jérôme Chave3, David A. Coomes23, William K. Cornwell8, Joseph M. Craine24, B. H. Dobrin9, Leandro da Silva Duarte16, Walter Durka25, James J. Elser26, Gerd Esser27, Marc Estiarte28, William F. Fagan29, Jingyun Fang, Fernando Fernández-Méndez30, Alessandra Fidelis31, Bryan Finegan20, Olivier Flores32, H. Ford33, Dorothea Frank1, Grégoire T. Freschet34, Nikolaos M. Fyllas14, Rachael V. Gallagher4, Walton A. Green35, Alvaro G. Gutiérrez25, Thomas Hickler, Steven I. Higgins36, John G. Hodgson37, Adel Jalili, Steven Jansen38, Carlos Alfredo Joly39, Andrew J. Kerkhoff40, Don Kirkup41, Kaoru Kitajima42, Michael Kleyer43, Stefan Klotz25, Johannes M. H. Knops44, Koen Kramer, Ingolf Kühn16, Hiroko Kurokawa45, Daniel C. Laughlin46, Tali D. Lee47, Michelle R. Leishman4, Frederic Lens48, Tanja Lenz4, Simon L. Lewis14, Jon Lloyd14, Jon Lloyd49, Joan Llusià28, Frédérique Louault50, Siyan Ma10, Miguel D. Mahecha1, Peter Manning51, Tara Joy Massad1, Belinda E. Medlyn4, Julie Messier9, Angela T. Moles52, Sandra Cristina Müller16, Karin Nadrowski53, Shahid Naeem54, Ülo Niinemets55, S. Nöllert1, A. Nüske1, Romà Ogaya28, Jacek Oleksyn56, Vladimir G. Onipchenko57, Yusuke Onoda58, Jenny C. Ordoñez59, Gerhard E. Overbeck16, Wim A. Ozinga59, Sandra Patiño14, Susana Paula60, Juli G. Pausas60, Josep Peñuelas28, Oliver L. Phillips14, Valério D. Pillar16, Hendrik Poorter, Lourens Poorter59, Peter Poschlod61, Andreas Prinzing62, Raphaël Proulx63, Anja Rammig64, Sabine Reinsch65, Björn Reu1, Lawren Sack66, Beatriz Salgado-Negret20, Jordi Sardans28, Satomi Shiodera67, Bill Shipley68, Andrew Siefert69, Enio E. Sosinski70, Jean-François Soussana50, Emily Swaine71, Nathan G. Swenson72, Ken Thompson37, Peter E. Thornton73, Matthew S. Waldram74, Evan Weiher47, Michael T. White75, S. White11, S. J. Wright76, Benjamin Yguel3, Sönke Zaehle1, Amy E. Zanne77, Christian Wirth58 
Max Planck Society1, National University of Cordoba2, Centre national de la recherche scientifique3, Macquarie University4, University of Paris-Sud5, University of Western Sydney6, University of Minnesota7, VU University Amsterdam8, University of Arizona9, University of California, Berkeley10, University of Guelph11, Australian National University12, University of Innsbruck13, University of Leeds14, University of Groningen15, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul16, University of Cape Town17, University of Wollongong18, New Jersey Institute of Technology19, Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza20, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory21, University of Alaska Fairbanks22, University of Cambridge23, Kansas State University24, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ25, Arizona State University26, University of Giessen27, Autonomous University of Barcelona28, University of Maryland, College Park29, Universidad del Tolima30, University of São Paulo31, University of La Réunion32, University of York33, University of Sydney34, Harvard University35, Goethe University Frankfurt36, University of Sheffield37, University of Ulm38, State University of Campinas39, Kenyon College40, Royal Botanic Gardens41, University of Florida42, University of Oldenburg43, University of Nebraska–Lincoln44, Tohoku University45, Northern Arizona University46, University of Wisconsin–Eau Claire47, Naturalis48, James Cook University49, Institut national de la recherche agronomique50, Newcastle University51, University of New South Wales52, Leipzig University53, Columbia University54, Estonian University of Life Sciences55, Polish Academy of Sciences56, Moscow State University57, Kyushu University58, Wageningen University and Research Centre59, Spanish National Research Council60, University of Regensburg61, University of Rennes62, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières63, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research64, Technical University of Denmark65, University of California, Los Angeles66, Hokkaido University67, Université de Sherbrooke68, Syracuse University69, Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária70, University of Aberdeen71, Michigan State University72, Oak Ridge National Laboratory73, University of Leicester74, Utah State University75, Smithsonian Institution76, University of Missouri77
01 Sep 2011
TL;DR: TRY as discussed by the authors is a global database of plant traits, including morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants and their organs, which can be used for a wide range of research from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology to biogeography.
Abstract: Plant traits – the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants and their organs – determine how primary producers respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, influence ecosystem processes and services and provide a link from species richness to ecosystem functional diversity. Trait data thus represent the raw material for a wide range of research from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology to biogeography. Here we present the global database initiative named TRY, which has united a wide range of the plant trait research community worldwide and gained an unprecedented buy-in of trait data: so far 93 trait databases have been contributed. The data repository currently contains almost three million trait entries for 69 000 out of the world's 300 000 plant species, with a focus on 52 groups of traits characterizing the vegetative and regeneration stages of the plant life cycle, including growth, dispersal, establishment and persistence. A first data analysis shows that most plant traits are approximately log-normally distributed, with widely differing ranges of variation across traits. Most trait variation is between species (interspecific), but significant intraspecific variation is also documented, up to 40% of the overall variation. Plant functional types (PFTs), as commonly used in vegetation models, capture a substantial fraction of the observed variation – but for several traits most variation occurs within PFTs, up to 75% of the overall variation. In the context of vegetation models these traits would better be represented by state variables rather than fixed parameter values. The improved availability of plant trait data in the unified global database is expected to support a paradigm shift from species to trait-based ecology, offer new opportunities for synthetic plant trait research and enable a more realistic and empirically grounded representation of terrestrial vegetation in Earth system models.

2,017 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Jens Kattge1, Gerhard Bönisch2, Sandra Díaz3, Sandra Lavorel  +751 moreInstitutions (314)
TL;DR: The extent of the trait data compiled in TRY is evaluated and emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness are analyzed to conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements.
Abstract: Plant traits-the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants-determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, and influence ecosystem properties and their benefits and detriments to people. Plant trait data thus represent the basis for a vast area of research spanning from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology, to biodiversity conservation, ecosystem and landscape management, restoration, biogeography and earth system modelling. Since its foundation in 2007, the TRY database of plant traits has grown continuously. It now provides unprecedented data coverage under an open access data policy and is the main plant trait database used by the research community worldwide. Increasingly, the TRY database also supports new frontiers of trait-based plant research, including the identification of data gaps and the subsequent mobilization or measurement of new data. To support this development, in this article we evaluate the extent of the trait data compiled in TRY and analyse emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness. Best species coverage is achieved for categorical traits-almost complete coverage for 'plant growth form'. However, most traits relevant for ecology and vegetation modelling are characterized by continuous intraspecific variation and trait-environmental relationships. These traits have to be measured on individual plants in their respective environment. Despite unprecedented data coverage, we observe a humbling lack of completeness and representativeness of these continuous traits in many aspects. We, therefore, conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements. This can only be achieved in collaboration with other initiatives.

882 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the concurrent effects of increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration, climate variability, and cropland establishment and abandonment on terrestrial carbon storage between 1920 and 1992 were assessed using a standard simulation protocol with four process-based terrestrial biosphere models.
Abstract: The concurrent effects of increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration, climate variability, and cropland establishment and abandonment on terrestrial carbon storage between 1920 and 1992 were assessed using a standard simulation protocol with four process-based terrestrial biosphere models. Over the long-term (1920-1992), the simulations yielded a time history of terrestrial uptake that is consistent (within the uncertainty) with a long-term analysis based on ice core and atmospheric CO2 data. Up to 1958, three of four analyses indicated a net release of carbon from terrestrial ecosystems to the atmosphere caused by cropland establishment. After 1958, all analyses indicate a net uptake of carbon by terrestrial ecosystems, primarily because of the physiological effects of rapidly rising atmospheric CO2. During the 1980s the simulations indicate that terrestrial ecosystems stored between 0.3 and 1.5 Pg C yr(-1), which is within the uncertainty of analysis based on CO2 and O-2 budgets. Three of the four models indicated tin accordance with O-2 evidence) that the tropics were approximately neutral while a net sink existed in ecosystems north of the tropics. Although all of the models agree that the long-term effect of climate on carbon storage has been small relative to the effects of increasing atmospheric CO2 and land use, the models disagree as to whether climate variability and change in the twentieth century has promoted carbon storage or release. Simulated interannual variability from 1958 generally reproduced the El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO)-scale variability in the atmospheric CO2 increase, but there were substantial differences in the magnitude of interannual variability simulated by the models. The analysis of the ability of the models to simulate the changing amplitude of the seasonal cycle of atmospheric CO2 suggested that the observed trend may be a consequence of CO2 effects, climate variability, land use changes, or a combination of these effects. The next steps for improving the process-based simulation of historical terrestrial carbon include (1) the transfer of insight gained from stand-level process studies to improve the sensitivity of simulated carbon storage responses to changes in CO2 and climate, (2) improvements in the data sets used to drive the models so that they incorporate the timing, extent, and types of major disturbances, (3) the enhancement of the models so that they consider major crop types and management schemes, (4) development of data sets that identify the spatial extent of major crop types and management schemes through time, and (5) the consideration of the effects of anthropogenic nitrogen deposition. The evaluation of the performance of the models in the context of a more complete consideration of the factors influencing historical terrestrial carbon dynamics is important for reducing uncertainties in representing the role of terrestrial ecosystems in future projections of the Earth system.

743 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, an intercomparison among terrestrial biogeochemical models (TBMs) is reported, in which one diagnostic and five prognostic models have been run with the same long-term climate forcing.
Abstract: Results of an intercomparison among terrestrial biogeochemical models (TBMs) are reported, in which one diagnostic and five prognostic models have been run with the same long-term climate forcing. Monthly fields of net ecosystem production (NEP), which is the difference between net primary production (NPP) and heterotrophic respiration RH, at 0.5° resolution have been generated for the terrestrial biosphere. The monthly estimates of NEP in conjunction with seasonal CO2 flux fields generated by the seasonal Hamburg Model of the Oceanic Carbon Cycle (HAMOCC3) and fossil fuel source fields were subsequently coupled to the three-dimensional atmospheric tracer transport model TM2 forced by observed winds. The resulting simulated seasonal signal of the atmospheric CO2 concentration extracted at the grid cells corresponding to the locations of 27 background monitoring stations of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics Laboratory network is compared with measurements from these sites. The Simple Diagnostic Biosphere Model (SDBM1), which is tuned to the atmospheric CO2 concentration at five monitoring stations in the northern hemisphere, successfully reproduced the seasonal signal of CO2 at the other monitoring stations. The SDBM1 simulations confirm that the north-south gradient in the amplitude of the atmospheric CO2 signal results from the greater northern hemisphere land area and the more pronounced seasonality of radiation and temperature in higher latitudes. In southern latitudes, ocean-atmosphere gas exchange plays an important role in determining the seasonal signal of CO2. Most of the five prognostic models (i.e., models driven by climatic inputs) included in the intercomparison predict in the northern hemisphere a reasonably accurate seasonal cycle in terms of amplitude and, to some extent, also with respect to phase. In the tropics, however, the prognostic models generally tend to overpredict the net seasonal exchanges and stronger seasonal cycles than indicated by the diagnostic model and by observations. The differences from the observed seasonal signal of CO2 may be caused by shortcomings in the phenology algorithms of the prognostic models or by not properly considering the effects of land use and vegetation fires on CO2 fluxes between the atmosphere and terrestrial biosphere.

158 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jul 1987-Tellus B
TL;DR: Besides the emissions from fossil sources, the anthropogenic land use changes (clearings and similar influences) the CO2 fertilization effect on the biosphere, and potential climatic fluctuations m...
Abstract: Besides the emissions from fossil sources, the anthropogenic land use changes (clearings and similar influences) the CO2 fertilization effect on the biosphere, and potential climatic fluctuations m...

153 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
07 Jun 2012-Nature
TL;DR: It is argued that human actions are dismantling the Earth’s ecosystems, eliminating genes, species and biological traits at an alarming rate, and the question of how such loss of biological diversity will alter the functioning of ecosystems and their ability to provide society with the goods and services needed to prosper is asked.
Abstract: The most unique feature of Earth is the existence of life, and the most extraordinary feature of life is its diversity. Approximately 9 million types of plants, animals, protists and fungi inhabit the Earth. So, too, do 7 billion people. Two decades ago, at the first Earth Summit, the vast majority of the world's nations declared that human actions were dismantling the Earth's ecosystems, eliminating genes, species and biological traits at an alarming rate. This observation led to the question of how such loss of biological diversity will alter the functioning of ecosystems and their ability to provide society with the goods and services needed to prosper.

5,244 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This new handbook has a better balance between whole-plant traits, leaf traits, root and stem traits and regenerative traits, and puts particular emphasis on traits important for predicting species’ effects on key ecosystem properties.
Abstract: Plant functional traits are the features (morphological, physiological, phenological) that represent ecological strategies and determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels and influence ecosystem properties. Variation in plant functional traits, and trait syndromes, has proven useful for tackling many important ecological questions at a range of scales, giving rise to a demand for standardised ways to measure ecologically meaningful plant traits. This line of research has been among the most fruitful avenues for understanding ecological and evolutionary patterns and processes. It also has the potential both to build a predictive set of local, regional and global relationships between plants and environment and to quantify a wide range of natural and human-driven processes, including changes in biodiversity, the impacts of species invasions, alterations in biogeochemical processes and vegetation–atmosphere interactions. The importance of these topics dictates the urgent need for more and better data, and increases the value of standardised protocols for quantifying trait variation of different species, in particular for traits with power to predict plant- and ecosystem-level processes, and for traits that can be measured relatively easily. Updated and expanded from the widely used previous version, this handbook retains the focus on clearly presented, widely applicable, step-by-step recipes, with a minimum of text on theory, and not only includes updated methods for the traits previously covered, but also introduces many new protocols for further traits. This new handbook has a better balance between whole-plant traits, leaf traits, root and stem traits and regenerative traits, and puts particular emphasis on traits important for predicting species’ effects on key ecosystem properties. We hope this new handbook becomes a standard companion in local and global efforts to learn about the responses and impacts of different plant species with respect to environmental changes in the present, past and future.

2,744 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The LPJ model as mentioned in this paper combines process-based, large-scale representations of terrestrial vegetation dynamics and land-atmosphere carbon and water exchanges in a modular framework, including feedback through canopy conductance between photosynthesis and transpiration and interactive coupling between these 'fast' processes and other ecosystem processes.
Abstract: The Lund-Potsdam-Jena Dynamic Global Vegetation Model (LPJ) combines process-based, large-scale representations of terrestrial vegetation dynamics and land-atmosphere carbon and water exchanges in a modular framework. Features include feedback through canopy conductance between photosynthesis and transpiration and interactive coupling between these 'fast' processes and other ecosystem processes including resource competition, tissue turnover, population dynamics, soil organic matter and litter dynamics and fire disturbance. Ten plants functional types (PFTs) are differentiated by physiological, morphological, phenological, bioclimatic and fire-response attributes. Resource competition and differential responses to fire between PFTs influence their relative fractional cover from year to year. Photosynthesis, evapotranspiration and soil water dynamics are modelled on a daily time step, while vegetation structure and PFT population densities are updated annually. Simulations have been made over the industrial period both for specific sites where field measurements were available for model evaluation, and globally on a 0.5degrees x 0.5degrees grid. Modelled vegetation patterns are consistent with observations, including remotely sensed vegetation structure and phenology. Seasonal cycles of net ecosystem exchange and soil moisture compare well with local measurements. Global carbon exchange fields used as input to an atmospheric tracer transport model (TM2) provided a good fit to observed seasonal cycles of CO2 concentration at all latitudes. Simulated inter-annual variability of the global terrestrial carbon balance is in phase with and comparable in amplitude to observed variability in the growth rate of atmospheric CO2 . Global terrestrial carbon and water cycle parameters (pool sizes and fluxes) lie within their accepted ranges. The model is being used to study past, present and future terrestrial ecosystem dynamics, biochemical and biophysical interactions between ecosystems and the atmosphere, and as a component of coupled Earth system models.

2,735 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
02 Apr 2015-Nature
TL;DR: A terrestrial assemblage database of unprecedented geographic and taxonomic coverage is analysed to quantify local biodiversity responses to land use and related changes and shows that in the worst-affected habitats, pressures reduce within-sample species richness by an average of 76.5%, total abundance by 39.5% and rarefaction-based richness by 40.3%.
Abstract: Human activities, especially conversion and degradation of habitats, are causing global biodiversity declines. How local ecological assemblages are responding is less clear--a concern given their importance for many ecosystem functions and services. We analysed a terrestrial assemblage database of unprecedented geographic and taxonomic coverage to quantify local biodiversity responses to land use and related changes. Here we show that in the worst-affected habitats, these pressures reduce within-sample species richness by an average of 76.5%, total abundance by 39.5% and rarefaction-based richness by 40.3%. We estimate that, globally, these pressures have already slightly reduced average within-sample richness (by 13.6%), total abundance (10.7%) and rarefaction-based richness (8.1%), with changes showing marked spatial variation. Rapid further losses are predicted under a business-as-usual land-use scenario; within-sample richness is projected to fall by a further 3.4% globally by 2100, with losses concentrated in biodiverse but economically poor countries. Strong mitigation can deliver much more positive biodiversity changes (up to a 1.9% average increase) that are less strongly related to countries' socioeconomic status.

2,532 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
28 Nov 2003
TL;DR: In this article, the authors highlight the complexity of land-use/cover change and propose a framework for a more general understanding of the issue, with emphasis on tropical regions, and argue that a systematic analysis of local-scale land use change studies, conducted over a range of timescales, helps to uncover general principles that provide an explanation and prediction of new land use changes.
Abstract: We highlight the complexity of land-use/cover change and propose a framework for a more general understanding of the issue, with emphasis on tropical regions. The review summarizes recent estimates on changes in cropland, agricultural intensification, tropical deforestation, pasture expansion, and urbanization and identifies the still unmeasured land-cover changes. Climate-driven land-cover modifications interact with land-use changes. Land-use change is driven by synergetic factor combinations of resource scarcity leading to an increase in the pressure of production on resources, changing opportunities created by markets, outside policy intervention, loss of adaptive capacity, and changes in social organization and attitudes. The changes in ecosystem goods and services that result from land-use change feed back on the drivers of land-use change. A restricted set of dominant pathways of land-use change is identified. Land-use change can be understood using the concepts of complex adaptive systems and transitions. Integrated, place-based research on land-use/land-cover change requires a combination of the agent-based systems and narrative perspectives of understanding. We argue in this paper that a systematic analysis of local-scale land-use change studies, conducted over a range of timescales, helps to uncover general principles that provide an explanation and prediction of new land-use changes.

2,491 citations