The geniuses at Columbia University’s Lamont -Doherty Earth Observatory have discovered Liebigs Law of the Minimum. The tree researcher exclaims: “I was expecting to see trees stressed from the warmer temperatures,”…“What we found was a surprise.”
Trees on Tundra’s Border Are Growing Faster in a Hotter Climate
Measuring Techniques Improve—But the Implications Are Not Certain

Evergreen trees at the edge of Alaska’s tundra are growing faster, suggesting that at least some forests may be adapting to a rapidly warming climate, says a new study.
While forests elsewhere are thinning from wildfires, insect damage and droughts partially attributed to global warming, some white spruce trees in the far north of Alaska have grown more vigorously in the last hundred years, especially since 1950, the study has found. The health of forests globally is gaining attention, because trees are thought to absorb a third of all industrial carbon emissions, transferring carbon dioxide into soil and wood. The study, in the journal Environmental Research Letters, spans 1,000 years and bolsters the idea that far northern ecosystems may play a future role in the balance of planet-warming carbon dioxide that remains in the air. It also strengthens support for an alternative technique for teasing climate data from trees in the far north, sidestepping recent methodological objections from climate skeptics.
“I was expecting to see trees stressed from the warmer temperatures,” said study lead author Laia Andreu-Hayles, a tree ring scientist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. “What we found was a surprise.”
Members of the Lamont Tree-Ring Lab have traveled repeatedly to Alaska, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge this past summer. In an area where the northern treeline gives way to open tundra, the scientists removed cores from living white spruces, as well as long-dead partially fossilized trees preserved under the cold conditions. In warm years, trees tend to produce wider, denser rings and in cool years, the rings are typically narrower and less dense. Using this basic idea and samples from a 2002 trip to the refuge, Andreu-Hayles and her colleagues assembled a climate timeline for Alaska’s Firth River region going back to the year 1067. They discovered that both tree-ring width and density shot up starting a hundred years ago, and rose even more after 1950. Their findings match a separate team’s study earlier this year that used satellite imagery and tree rings to also show that trees in this region are growing faster, but that survey extended only to 1982.
The added growth is happening as the arctic faces rapid warming. While global temperatures since the 1950s rose 1.6 degrees F, parts of the northern latitudes warmed 4 to 5 degrees F. “For the moment, warmer temperatures are helping the trees along the tundra,” said study coauthor Kevin Anchukaitis, a tree-ring scientist at Lamont. “It’s a fairly wet, fairly cool, site overall, so those longer growing seasons allow the trees to grow more.”

The outlook may be less favorable for the vast interior forests that ring the Arctic Circle. Satellite images have revealed swaths of brown, dying vegetation and a growing number of catastrophic wildfires in the last decade across parts of interior Alaska, Canada and Russia. Evidence suggests forests elsewhere are struggling, too. In the American West, bark beetles benefitting from milder winters have devastated millions of acres of trees weakened by lack of water. A 2009 study in the journal Science found that mortality rates in once healthy old-growth conifer forests have doubled in the past few decades. Heat and water stress are also affecting some tropical forests already threatened by clear-cutting for farming and development.
Another paper in Science recently estimated that the world’s 10 billion acres of forest are now absorbing about a third of carbon emissions, helping to limit carbon dioxide levels and keep the planet cooler than it would be otherwise.
There are already signs that the treeline is pushing north, and if this continues, northern ecosystems will change. Warming temperatures have benefitted not only white spruce, the dominant treeline species in northwestern North America, but also woody deciduous shrubs on the tundra, which have begun shading out other plants as they expand their range. As habitats change, scientists are asking whether insects, migratory songbirds, caribou and other animals that have evolved to exploit the tundra environment will adapt. “Some of these changes will be ecologically beneficial, but others may not,” said Natalie Boelman, an ecologist at Lamont-Doherty who is studying the effects of climate change in the Alaskan tundra.
In another finding, the study strengthens scientists’ ability to use tree rings to measure past climate. Since about 1950, tree ring widths in some northern locations have stopped varying in tandem with temperature, even though modern instruments confirm that temperatures are on a steady rise. As scientists looked for ways to get around the problem, critics of modern climate science dismissed the tree ring data as unreliable and accused scientists of cooking up tricks to support the theory of global warming. The accusations came to a head when stolen mails discussing the discrepancy between tree-ring records and actual temperatures came to light during the so-called “Climategate” episode of 2009-10.
The fact that temperatures were rising was never really in dispute among scientists, who had thermometers as well as tree rings to confirm the trend. But still scientists struggled with how to correct for the so-called “divergence problem.’’ The present study adds support for another proxy for tree growth: ring density. Trees tend to produce cells with thicker walls at the end of the growing season, forming a dark band of dense wood. While tree-ring width in some places stops correlating with temperature after 1950, possibly due to moisture stress or changes in seasonality due to warming, tree ring density at the site studied continues to track temperature.
“This is methodologically a big leap forward that will allow scientists to go back to sites sampled in the past and fill in the gaps,” said Glenn Juday, a forest ecologist at University of Alaska, Fairbanks, who was not involved in the study. The researchers plan to return to Alaska and other northern forest locations to improve geographical coverage and get more recent records from some sites. They are also investigating the use of stable isotopes to extract climate information from tree rings.
Other authors of the study include Rosanne D’Arrigo, Lamont-Doherty; Pieter Beck and Scott Goetz, Woods Hole Research Center and David Frank, Swiss Federal Research Institute. The study received funding from the Swiss and US national science foundations.
I’m surprised they were surprised! No, really, I was!
Apparently the equatorial regions of the planet are unknown to these folks. They should get out more. Maybe take a trip to Hawaii.
Really, these people are retarded, more food CO2 and more energy(solar ) and they are suprised then trees grown faster ??
Maybe we should get the onto that Grant’s Tomb conundrum!
Holy cow, has that researcher *never* planted a garden? Has she never heard of paleontologists describe the various times of the dinosaurs and how plants did in warmer temperatures back then?
Seriously, what-the-****… How can you call yourself a researcher and be surprised by this? the only explanation I can see is that you would have to have swallowed all the alarmism about AGW hook-line-and-sinker.
So that tree moaning moaning hippy video needs to be subtitled, as a translation from the Post Darwinian Giaian dialect.
Offer a translation that the Greenies are secretly crying out for more heat and co2/carbon, and the stupid scientists are not hearing her cry in the wilderness.
Sort of like the ex-german leader Bunker video keeps getting subtitled.
How can anyone publish this drivel with a straight face? Honestly. How can the media not ridicule such utter nonsense?
That’s chemical kinetics — the second point indicated by Arrhenius on CO2!
(carbon fix rate) = (rate constant) * (CO2 concentration)
rate constant = (pre-exponential factor) * exp[-(activation energy)/(gas constant * temperature)]
That’s how CO2 and temperature work!
One should also consider logging practices. These are my opinions but they are based on the reports of loggers and forest managers who represent a long history of feet on the ground logging practices. Logging opens up tree stands allowing for better response to favorable and even unfavorable conditions. Natural fires do the same thing. However, after the logging boom ended, increased fire suppression and decreased logging resulted in dense stands, slowing growth as competition for nutrients and sunlight increased. Any kind of use of tree ring data; IE width, cell density, etc, will be fraught with variables (some natural, some anthropogenic) other than temperature.
“As scientists looked for ways to get around the problem …”
Surely “As scientists sought to understand the discrepancy by undertaking further research …” ?
“… stolen mails …”
Surely “mails released into the public domain” ?
This puff hardly inspires confidence in the integrity of the research.
I’m shocked, SHOCKED!
duncan binks says:
November 11, 2011 at 9:01 am
I’m surprised they were surprised! No, really, I was!
I’m surprised your suprised they were surprised!
And the Woods Hole “Research Center” is part of the team – THAT’S reassuring!
I am presently looking for a $18,000,000 government grant to enable me to study the effects of placing vegetables into a hothouse and feeding them fertiliser and an enhanced CO2 atmosphere. With 6-7 years of experimentation and intensive study in the Mauritius or Lord Howe Island I feel I may be able to confirm the findings of commercial growers.
The tree researcher exclaims: “I was expecting to see trees stressed from the warmer temperatures,”…“What we found was a surprise.”
A little bit of common sense would go a long way. But, apparently, it ain’t so common.
I met up with an old friend last year, who did microbiology. He said that he had spent months on end doing nothing but cutting up samples for microscope slides. Now they don’t do any of that. No practical experience! Maybe they imagine the computer screen is sufficient understanding. And the bone-idle academics have spent the intervening years discussing what the students don’t need to learn.
Will these self styled journalist “experts” ever stop this baseless propaganda. The cycle of growth, build up of underbrush, then fire which creates rejuvenation of the forests is well known and widely acknowledged. Yellowstone Park was a good example of well meaning forest rangers pouncing on every little fire breakout until the underbrush got so thick the big one started and they were powerless to control it several years ago. Maybe California will learn this lesson one day but it is very hard to teach the egomaniac californians anything that is why the potentially richest state in the union is bankrupt. Just north in Canada they have a limited fire policy which allows fires to happen naturally, result, sure we have fires but they are limited and they rejuvenate the forests. As usual so much propaganda and misinformation from our illustrious news media.
“Since about 1950, tree ring widths in some northern locations have stopped varying in tandem with temperature, even though modern instruments confirm that temperatures are on a steady rise. As scientists looked for ways to get around the problem, critics of modern climate science dismissed the tree ring data as unreliable and accused scientists of cooking up tricks to support the theory of global warming.”
What “modern instruments” are they talking about? The ones at the local roof tops or tarmacs? I just logged 60 acres, the stumps all show the last 10-12 years with less growth. than previous 20 years or so. I assumed it was colder or some other stress, negating the increase in CO2.
“I was expecting to see trees stressed from the warmer temperatures,”…“What we found was a surprise.”
You have to be kidding. How fast do trees grow in the tropics as apposed to mountain timberlines?
Can’t wait til they discover the Sun!
“I was expecting to see trees stressed from the warmer temperatures,” said study lead author
At least she admits that she had preconceived religious beliefs.
Perhaps this will raise her awareness to the propaganda she has been living and breathing in our schools and Universities.
It is the same with Polar Bears. Anyone actually willing to go to Churchill, Manitoba and see for themselves will discover that the truth is diametrically opposite to what the CAGW WWF propagandists have been telling everyone. There is at least a FIVE-FOLD increase in Polar Bear populations since the late 70’s and the start of the entire CAGW scare….
I guess they never had a garden.
The only thing that grows better in colder climates is fur, fat deposits and bones.
David Jay
November 11, 2011 at 9:34 am
And the Woods Hole “Research Center” is part of the team – THAT’S reassuring!
###
Beat me to it.
Perhaps they missed the memo that the earth’s biomass is on the rise.
I’m sure this does come as a surprise to climate boffins. I pretty much consider them to be idiot savants at this point. I’d rather think they are honest imbeciles than evil geniuses for as long as humanly possible.
Most of these comments are simply disrespectful and unworthy of further criticism. It is clear from this research that forests are in the process of dramatic change and it is a stretch to imagine a positive outcome after these changes. Given the host of negative synergies (eg wildfire), we should be very concerned about the prospects for a diminished boreal forest and it’s immense capacity to absorb CO2. Incidentally, these changes can be observed and I encourage your correspondents to make a trip to northern Canada or Alaska.