Local factors restrain forest warming: Microclimates are key to understanding how organisms and ecosystems respond to macroclimate change, yet they are frequently neglected when studying biotic responses to global change. Zellweger et al. provide a long-term, continental-scale assessment of the effects of micro- and macroclimate on the community composition of European forests (see the Perspective by Lembrechts and Nijs). They show that changes in forest canopy cover are fundamentally important for driving community responses to climate change. Closed canopies buffer against the effects of macroclimatic change through their cooling effect, slowing shifts in community composition, whereas open canopies tend to accelerate community change through local heating effects. Science , this issue p. 772 ; see also p. 711

Research in global change ecology relies heavily on global climatic grids derived from estimates of air temperature in open areas at around 2 m above the ground. These climatic grids do not reflect conditions below vegetation canopies and near the ground surface, where critical ecosystem functions occur and most terrestrial species reside. Here, we provide global maps of soil temperature and bioclimatic variables at a 1‐km²resolution for 0–5 and 5–15 cm soil depth. These maps were created by calculating the difference (i.e. offset) between in situ soil temperature measurements, based on time series from over 1200 1‐km²pixels (summarized from 8519 unique temperature sensors) across all the world's major terrestrial biomes, and coarse‐grained air temperature estimates from ERA5‐Land (an atmospheric reanalysis by the European Centre for Medium‐Range Weather Forecasts). We show that mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10°C (mean = 3.0 ± 2.1°C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons. Over the year, soils in cold and/or dry biomes are substantially warmer (+3.6 ± 2.3°C) than gridded air temperature, whereas soils in warm and humid environments are on average slightly cooler (−0.7 ± 2.3°C). The observed substantial and biome‐specific offsets emphasize that the projected impacts of climate and climate change on near‐surface biodiversity and ecosystem functioning are inaccurately assessed when air rather than soil temperature is used, especially in cold environments. The global soil‐related bioclimatic variables provided here are an important step forward for any application in ecology and related disciplines. Nevertheless, we highlight the need to fill remaining geographic gaps by collecting more in situ measurements of microclimate conditions to further enhance the spatiotemporal resolution of global soil temperature products for ecological applications.

Aim: Forest understorey microclimates are often buffered against extreme heat or cold, with important implications for the organisms living in these environments. We quantified seasonal effects of understorey microclimate predictors describing canopy structure, canopy composition and topography (i.e., local factors) and the forest patch size and distance to the coast (i.e., landscape factors).Location: Temperate forests in Europe.Time period: 2017–2018.Major taxa studied: Woody plants.Methods: We combined data from a microclimate sensor network with weather‐station records to calculate the difference, or offset, between temperatures measured inside and outside forests. We used regression analysis to study the effects of local and landscape factors on the seasonal offset of minimum, mean and maximum temperatures.Results: The maximum temperature during the summer was on average cooler by 2.1 °C inside than outside forests, and the minimum temperatures during the winter and spring were 0.4 and 0.9 °C warmer. The local canopy cover was a strong nonlinear driver of the maximum temperature offset during summer, and we found increased cooling beneath tree species that cast the deepest shade. Seasonal offsets of minimum temperature were mainly regulated by landscape and topographic features, such as the distance to the coast and topographic position.Main conclusions: Forest organisms experience less severe temperature extremes than suggested by currently available macroclimate data; therefore, climate–species relationships and the responses of species to anthropogenic global warming cannot be modelled accurately in forests using macroclimate data alone. Changes in canopy cover and composition will strongly modulate the warming of maximum temperatures in forest understories, with important implications for understanding the responses of forest biodiversity and functioning to the combined threats of land‐use change and climate change. Our predictive models are generally applicable across lowland temperate deciduous forests, providing ecologically important microclimate data for forest understories.

Brief introduction: What are microclimates and why are they important?: Microclimate science has developed into a global discipline. Microclimate science is increasingly used to understand and mitigate climate and biodiversity shifts. Here, we provide an overview of the current status of microclimate ecology and biogeography in terrestrial ecosystems, and where this field is heading next.Microclimate investigations in ecology and biogeography: We highlight the latest research on interactions between microclimates and organisms, including how microclimates influence individuals, and through them populations, communities and entire ecosystems and their processes. We also briefly discuss recent research on how organisms shape microclimates from the tropics to the poles.Microclimate applications in ecosystem management: Microclimates are also important in ecosystem management under climate change. We showcase new research in microclimate management with examples from biodiversity conservation, forestry and urban ecology. We discuss the importance of microrefugia in conservation and how to promote microclimate heterogeneity.Methods for microclimate science: We showcase the recent advances in data acquisition, such as novel field sensors and remote sensing methods. We discuss microclimate modelling, mapping and data processing, including accessibility of modelling tools, advantages of mechanistic and statistical modelling and solutions for computational challenges that have pushed the state‐of‐the‐art of the field.What's next?: We identify major knowledge gaps that need to be filled for further advancing microclimate investigations, applications and methods. These gaps include spatiotemporal scaling of microclimate data, mismatches between macroclimate and microclimate in predicting responses of organisms to climate change, and the need for more evidence on the outcomes of microclimate management.