Beech Bark Disease in an Unmanaged Temperate Forest: Patterns, Predictors, and Impacts on Ecosystem Function

Beech Bark Disease (BBD) is a devastating threat to American beech (Fagus grandifolia), spreading through eastern mixed deciduous forests of North America at unprecedented rates. Understanding how and why some beech trees escape severe BBD effects is important; however, the biotic and abiotic factors that underpin the progression of BBD within unmanaged forests at local scales are not well explored. We surveyed 651 individual beech trees ≥ 10 cm diameter at breast height (DBH) for BBD, in a 13.5-ha unmanaged forest dynamics plot in Ontario, Canada, where >46,000 trees have been identified to species, mapped, and DBH measured at ∼5-year intervals. For each beech tree, BBD severity was ranked on a 5-point severity index, which was then evaluated as a function of tree characteristics including DBH and relative growth rate (RGR). Most beech trees were at either the insect or fungal stage of BBD, with only 22% of beech trees being free of symptoms. Ordinal logistic regression analysis indicated both DBH and RGR were significant predictors of BBD severity. These models, along with both randomization and Moran’s Eigenvector Maps (MEM) analyses, indicated that DBH and RGR and their spatial variation accounted for ∼44.6% of BBD severity in trees. Our MEMs also indicated ∼4.2% of variation in BBD severity was associated with unmeasured spatial variables, which may reflect either the spread of BBD through our study site, or the influence of abiotic variables on BBD severity. At our site, BBD is responsible for at least ∼6.0 Mg C ha–1, or ∼6.5% of the average 92.5 Mg of aboveground biomass C ha–1, transitioning from the live to dead biomass pool. Our study enhances the understanding of the factors predicting the severity of a major forest pathogen in North American temperate forests, assists the integration of BBD severity risk into forest C budget models, and provides insight into how large-scale forest inventories can inform screening for pest or pathogen resistance in trees.

[1]  Erle C. Ellis,et al.  ForestGEO: Understanding forest diversity and dynamics through a global observatory network , 2021, Biological Conservation.

[2]  S. Davies,et al.  Tree death and damage: A standardized protocol for frequent surveys in tropical forests , 2021 .

[3]  K. Mulder,et al.  A Bayesian analysis of topographic influences on the presence and severity of beech bark disease , 2020 .

[4]  Kun Xu,et al.  Greater than the sum of the parts: how the species composition in different forest strata influence ecosystem function. , 2019, Ecology letters.

[5]  Sean C. Thomas,et al.  Global patterns in wood carbon concentration across the world’s trees and forests , 2018, Nature Geoscience.

[6]  Genome-wide association study identifies a major gene for beech bark disease resistance in American beech (Fagus grandifolia Ehrh.) , 2017, BMC Genomics.

[7]  J. Cale,et al.  Beech bark disease in North America: Over a century of research revisited , 2017 .

[8]  N. Coe,et al.  Impacts of Beech Bark Disease and Climate Change on American Beech , 2017 .

[9]  William J. McShea,et al.  Patterns of tree mortality in a temperate deciduous forest derived from a large forest dynamics plot , 2016 .

[10]  J. Schurman.  From Plant Properties To Forest Function In Temperate Mixed Angiosperm-Conifer Old Growth , 2016 .

[11]  S. Weisberg,et al.  Effect Displays for Linear, Generalized Linear, and Other Models , 2015 .

[12]  B. Ripley.  Support Functions and Datasets for Venables and Ripley's MASS , 2015 .

[13]  Adam R. Martin,et al.  Variation in carbon and nitrogen concentration among major woody tissue types in temperate trees , 2015 .

[14]  G. Boyer,et al.  New ecological and physiological dimensions of beech bark disease development in aftermath forests , 2015 .

[15]  J. Murphy,et al.  Net ecosystem exchange of an uneven-aged managed forest in central Ontario, and the impact of a spring heat wave event , 2014 .

[16]  M. GienckeLisa,et al.  Beech bark disease: spatial patterns of thicket formation and disease spread in an aftermath forest in the northeastern United States , 2014 .

[17]  Sean C. Thomas,et al.  Temporal dynamics and causes of postharvest mortality in a selection- managed tolerant hardwood forest , 2014 .

[18]  The impact of beech thickets on biodiversity , 2013, Biological Invasions.

[19]  M. Humphries,et al.  Marten and fisher responses to fluctuations in prey populations and mast crops in the northern hardwood forest , 2012 .

[20]  D. Réale,et al.  Anticipation and tracking of pulsed resources drive population dynamics in eastern chipmunks. , 2011, Ecology.

[21]  C. Canham,et al.  An exotic insect and pathogen disease complex reduces aboveground tree biomass in temperate forests of eastern North America , 2011 .

[22]  A. Finkral,et al.  A New Look at Spread Rates of Exotic Diseases in North American Forests , 2010 .

[23]  C. Nelson,et al.  Assessment of beech scale resistance in full- and half-sibling American beech families , 2010 .

[24]  J. A. Trofymow,et al.  CBM-CFS3: A model of carbon-dynamics in forestry and land-use change implementing IPCC standards , 2009 .

[25]  W. A. Kurza,et al.  CBM-CFS 3 : A model of carbon-dynamics in forestry and land-use change implementing IPCC standards , 2009 .

[26]  K. Weathers,et al.  Carbon cycling along a gradient of beech bark disease impact in the Catskill Mountains, New York , 2008 .

[27]  Andrew M. Liebhold,et al.  Spread of beech bark disease in the eastern United States and its relationship to regional forest composition , 2007 .

[28]  F. Raulier,et al.  Canadian national tree aboveground biomass equations , 2005 .

[29]  Kristine D. Johnson,et al.  Associations Between Causal Agents of the Beech Bark Disease Complex [Cryptococcus fagisuga (Homoptera: Cryptococcidae) and Nectria spp.] in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park , 2004 .

[30]  K. Weathers,et al.  The distribution and severity of beech bark disease in the Catskill Mountains, N.Y. , 2003 .

[31]  M. Mitchell,et al.  Effects of Beech Bark Disease on Aboveground Biomass and Species Composition in a Mature Northern Hardwood Forest, 1985 to 2000 , 2003 .

[32]  Hendrik Poorter,et al.  Avoiding bias in calculations of relative growth rate. , 2002, Annals of botany.

[33]  Gregory G. McGee.  The contribution of beech bark disease-induced mortality to coarse woody debris loads in northern hardwood stands of Adirondack Park, New York, U.S.A. , 2000 .

[34]  H. Prosper.  Bayesian Analysis , 2000, hep-ph/0006356.

[35]  D. Houston.  Major New Tree Disease Epidemics: Beech Bark Disease , 1994 .

[36]  R. O’Connor,et al.  Synchronous Reproduction by Maine Black Bears , 1994 .

[37]  P. Wargo.  Amino nitrogen and phenolic constituents of bark of American beech, Fagus grandifolia, and infestation by beech scale, Cryptococcus fagisuga , 1988 .

[38]  R. Perrin,et al.  Influence de la nutrition du hêtre (Fagus sylvatica L.) sur la sensibilité au chancre provoqué par Nectria ditissima Tul. , 1984 .

[39]  A. Shigo.  The Beech Bark Disease Today in the Northeastern U.S. , 1972 .

[40]  J. Ehrlich.  THE BEECH BARK DISEASE: A NECTRIA DISEASE OF FAGUS, FOLLOWING CRYPTOCOCCUS FAGI (BAER.) , 1934 .