@misc{SchurrPagelSarmentoetal.2012,
  author    = {Schurr, Frank Martin and Pagel, J{\"o}rn and Sarmento, Juliano Sarmento and Groeneveld, Juergen and Bykova, Olga and O'Hara, Robert B. and Hartig, Florian and Kissling, W. Daniel and Linder, H. Peter and Midgley, Guy F. and Schr{\"o}der-Esselbach, Boris and Singer, Alexander and Zimmermann, Niklaus E.},
  title     = {How to understand species' niches and range dynamics: a demographic research agenda for biogeography},
  series = {Journal of biogeography},
  volume    = {39},
  journal   = {Journal of biogeography},
  number    = {12},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {0305-0270},
  doi       = {10.1111/j.1365-2699.2012.02737.x},
  pages     = {2146 -- 2162},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Range dynamics causes mismatches between a species geographical distribution and the set of suitable environments in which population growth is positive (the Hutchinsonian niche). This is because sourcesink population dynamics cause species to occupy unsuitable environments, and because environmental change creates non-equilibrium situations in which species may be absent from suitable environments (due to migration limitation) or present in unsuitable environments that were previously suitable (due to time-delayed extinction). Because correlative species distribution models do not account for these processes, they are likely to produce biased niche estimates and biased forecasts of future range dynamics. Recently developed dynamic range models (DRMs) overcome this problem: they statistically estimate both range dynamics and the underlying environmental response of demographic rates from species distribution data. This process-based statistical approach qualitatively advances biogeographical analyses. Yet, the application of DRMs to a broad range of species and study systems requires substantial research efforts in statistical modelling, empirical data collection and ecological theory. Here we review current and potential contributions of these fields to a demographic understanding of niches and range dynamics. Our review serves to formulate a demographic research agenda that entails: (1) advances in incorporating process-based models of demographic responses and range dynamics into a statistical framework, (2) systematic collection of data on temporal changes in distribution and abundance and on the response of demographic rates to environmental variation, and (3) improved theoretical understanding of the scaling of demographic rates and the dynamics of spatially coupled populations. This demographic research agenda is challenging but necessary for improved comprehension and quantification of niches and range dynamics. It also forms the basis for understanding how niches and range dynamics are shaped by evolutionary dynamics and biotic interactions. Ultimately, the demographic research agenda should lead to deeper integration of biogeography with empirical and theoretical ecology.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{FrankReichsteinBahnetal.2015,
  author    = {Frank, Dorothe A. and Reichstein, Markus and Bahn, Michael and Thonicke, Kirsten and Frank, David and Mahecha, Miguel D. and Smith, Pete and Van der Velde, Marijn and Vicca, Sara and Babst, Flurin and Beer, Christian and Buchmann, Nina and Canadell, Josep G. and Ciais, Philippe and Cramer, Wolfgang and Ibrom, Andreas and Miglietta, Franco and Poulter, Ben and Rammig, Anja and Seneviratne, Sonia I. and Walz, Ariane and Wattenbach, Martin and Zavala, Miguel A. and Zscheischler, Jakob},
  title     = {Effects of climate extremes on the terrestrial carbon cycle: concepts, processes and potential future impacts},
  series = {Global change biology},
  volume    = {21},
  journal   = {Global change biology},
  number    = {8},
  publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {1354-1013},
  doi       = {10.1111/gcb.12916},
  pages     = {2861 -- 2880},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Extreme droughts, heat waves, frosts, precipitation, wind storms and other climate extremes may impact the structure, composition and functioning of terrestrial ecosystems, and thus carbon cycling and its feedbacks to the climate system. Yet, the interconnected avenues through which climate extremes drive ecological and physiological processes and alter the carbon balance are poorly understood. Here, we review the literature on carbon cycle relevant responses of ecosystems to extreme climatic events. Given that impacts of climate extremes are considered disturbances, we assume the respective general disturbance-induced mechanisms and processes to also operate in an extreme context. The paucity of well-defined studies currently renders a quantitative meta-analysis impossible, but permits us to develop a deductive framework for identifying the main mechanisms (and coupling thereof) through which climate extremes may act on the carbon cycle. We find that ecosystem responses can exceed the duration of the climate impacts via lagged effects on the carbon cycle. The expected regional impacts of future climate extremes will depend on changes in the probability and severity of their occurrence, on the compound effects and timing of different climate extremes, and on the vulnerability of each land-cover type modulated by management. Although processes and sensitivities differ among biomes, based on expert opinion, we expect forests to exhibit the largest net effect of extremes due to their large carbon pools and fluxes, potentially large indirect and lagged impacts, and long recovery time to regain previous stocks. At the global scale, we presume that droughts have the strongest and most widespread effects on terrestrial carbon cycling. Comparing impacts of climate extremes identified via remote sensing vs. ground-based observational case studies reveals that many regions in the (sub-)tropics are understudied. Hence, regional investigations are needed to allow a global upscaling of the impacts of climate extremes on global carbon-climate feedbacks.},
  language  = {en}
}