From Wiley-Blackwell, via Eurekalert, something just plain surprising.

Nibbling by herbivores can have a greater impact on the width of tree rings than climate, new research has found. The study, published this week in the British Ecological Society’s journal Functional Ecology, could help increase the accuracy of the tree ring record as a way of estimating past climatic conditions.
Many factors in addition to climate are known to affect the tree ring record, including attack from parasites and herbivores, but determining how important these other factors have been in the past is difficult.
Working high in the mountains of southern Norway, midway between Oslo and Bergen, a team from Norway and Scotland fenced off a large area of mountainside and divided it into different sections into each of which a set density of domestic sheep was released every summer.
After nine summers, cross sections of 206 birch trees were taken and tree ring widths were measured. Comparing these with local temperature and the numbers of sheep at the location where the tree was growing allowed the team to disentangle the relationship between temperature and browsing by sheep and the width of tree rings.
According to lead author Dr James Speed of the NTNU Museum of Natural History and Archaeology: “We found tree ring widths were more affected by sheep than the ambient temperature at the site, although temperatures were still visible in the tree ring records. This shows that the density of herbivores affects the tree ring record, at least in places with slow-growing trees.”
The impact of large herbivores on tree rings has, until now, been largely unknown, so these findings could help increase the accuracy of the tree ring record as a way of estimating past climatic conditions, says Dr Speed: “Our study highlights that other factors interact with climate to affect tree rings, and that to increase the accuracy of the tree ring record to estimate past climatic conditions, you need to take into account the history of wild and domestic herbivores. The good news is that past densities of herbivores can be estimated from historic records, and from the fossilised remains of spores from fungi that live on dung.”
“This study does not mean that using tree rings to infer past climate is flawed as we can still see the effect of temperatures on the rings, and in lowland regions tree rings are less likely to have been affected by herbivores because they can grow out of reach faster,” he explains.
Tree rings give us a window into the past, and have been widely used as climate recorders since the early 1900s. The growth rings are visible in tree trunk cross sections, and are formed in seasonal environments as the wood is laid down faster in summer than winter. In years with better growing conditions (in cool locations this usually means warmer) tree rings are wider, and because trees can be very long-lived and wood is easily preserved, for example in bogs and lakes, this allows very long time-series to be established, and climatic conditions to be estimated from the ring widths.
The study was funded by the Norwegian Research Council and the Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management.
James D. M. Speed, Gunnar Austrheim, Alison J. Hester and Atle Mysterud (2011), ‘Browsing interacts with climate to determine tree ring increment’, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2011.01877.x, is published in Functional Ecology on 27 July 2011.
===============================================================
When asked for comment about their effects on tree ring widths, possibly affecting paleoclimate studies based on tree rings, the sheep denied complicity and said repeatedly “Maaaa aaa aann Maaaa aaa aann“.
…
For those wanting a primer on all the things that can affect tree growth, may I suggest this primer.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
So Dr. Mann did ewe factor in sheep in your reconstructions?
The last sentence is brilliant!
Judging by the decrease in the number of people who believe in AGW, I would have to say that sheep density is declining.
Ah, so Mann wasn’t counting tree rings in his sleep–he was counting sheep instead. I wish he’d wake up! Or should his “hockey stick” be renamed to “lamb chops”?
Did he say what the effect was? I didn’t see it. Does browsing stunt the ring growth or does sheep manure increase it? Or don’t they know?
“…numbers of sheep at the location where the tree was growing…”
This number was difficult to ascertain as the research team had a tendency to fall asleep whilst collecting this data.
Interested readers re-examine McIntyre and McKitrick 2005 (EE), where the potential impact of sheep on SW US trees was considered. I think that we even quoted John Muir, the founder of the Sierra Club.
Now when caught, they’ll claim that pulling the wool over our eyes is normal practice.
Steve, there will never be another ewe.
Why do I not find this [sur]prising and depressing at the same time?
We’re doomed ya know?
We’ll keep pointing out that the whole AGW scene is a crock of lies, untruths, misinformation and deceit, but the MSM isn’t buying in and therefore politicians will continue to delude themselves while they believe they’re on a winner.
Meanwhile the west is spinning towards the plug hole as the bathwater empties from our economies.
All along, we’ve known that Mann & Jones, poor lambs, were relying on sheep in the media and their sheer flocculent thinking.
When it’s warming it’s climate, when it’s cooling it’s wethers.
This is not going to stop the AGW industry trying to fleece us at every turn.
“This shows the density of herbivores affects the tree ring record.” Is Mann a vegetarian?
First, Moira has a brilliant jab. Just awesome.
Second, what about insects?
Sheep? Sheep eat trees? I thought sheep eat grass.
Now moose, on the other hand, reach down and eat the tops off maple saplings. Or they’ll step on one and it will never be the same. Sometimes in the spring I can use sapling height as a proxy for snow depth – when I see all the saplings trimmed down to the same height, I figure that’s where the snow line was.
Climate-wise it’s tough to be a tree in New England. Add moose and all of a sudden the race to the sunny level becomes a lot more challenging.
Just one thing bothers me – once a tree gets to be a couple centimeters in diameter, the moose leave it alone and so I’d expect most of the tree rings will unaffected, it’s just the first few years that are problematic.
Isnt it about time that we just go with tree ring growth is only a good proxy for the thickness of the tree ring?
So tree rings are a proxy for the density of herbivores. The density of herbivores is a proxy for the density of foliage. The density of foliage is a proxy of CO2. CO2 is a proxy for temperatures. See? No problem. Just another subroutine in the model.
Many factors in addition to climate are known to affect the tree ring record, including attack from parasites and herbivores, but determining how important these other factors have been in the past is difficult.
You know, I have NEVER read ANY tree ring temperature proxy EVER corrected for the rise in CO2 that the Idso family have so cleverly identified as causing a 12 – 27% INCREASE in the growth rates of every living green thing on earth.
Could his hated CO2 be the cause of Mann’s “decline” in the supposed temperature proxy in the past 50 years? If he is expecting an increase in tree rings only from temperature effects, what happens when his trees begin growing faster because they have more plant food? If/when the opposite happens, and temperatures (start to rise from the LIA in 1650) rise AND plant food starts to rise but from a different date (the mid-1950’s), what happens to his conversions?
When they have competing effects of less water and more CO2? Has the CO2 levels really been smooth and even the past 2000 years? Can tree rings establish a different record than what Mann hopes/dreams/lives to find?
We really must keep ram-ming this sort of research home to Mann!
Kinda feel sorry for Mann et. al. Devote your career to this business and then get thrown for a loop like this. Another variable for the climate modelers. If sheep can have this effect, what about all the other critters?
“This study does not mean that using tree rings to infer past climate is flawed…”
Yes it does, and it’s worse than we thought.
Sheepishly, Mann walks through the valley of dung…on a hot day…tippy toeing between rings of fantasy, boldly going where no sheep dare squat.
“The impact of large herbivores on tree rings has, until now, been largely unknown, so these findings could help increase the accuracy of the tree ring record as a way of estimating past climatic conditions, says Dr Speed:”
Thats utter crap. New Zealand scientists proved this relationship back in the 70s and introduced agroforestry.. the integration of sheep and trees to take advantage of the extra nitrogen made available by the animals. The increase in diameter (and thus ring width) and wood volumes in such circumstances are of the order of 40%. That scientific information is well known throughout the farming and forestry communities as well as published in international scientific journals.
JC
And I’ll say this again, this also calls into question the whole idea of dendrochronology.
If trees are more influenced by local conditions, such as canopy cover and herbivores, then they are not so influenced by global or regional climatic issues. If that is the case, you cannot use tree-ring widths to measure climate – and you cannot match them all up, one tree against another, into a great long series that measures chronology.
Even if you could find some pristine forest where the tree rings measured climate and you could form a historical series – the wood sample you are measuring and ‘dating’ is not from a pristine forest. In which case, its rings may have been influenced more by its overbearing neighbour and dolly the sheep, than the climate that created your wonderful tree-ring series. In which case, how on earth can you match the rings in the sample, with the pristine tree ring record, and thus derive a date?
.
So…I wonder how many other factors affecting tree-ring growth were overlooked by Mann et al?