Jeanne C. Chambers

Dr. Jeanne C. Chambers


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

44Years (1983-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
12 July 2019 in Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JCJeanne C. Chambers
Jeanne C. Chambers
CACraig R. Allen
Craig R. Allen
SCSamuel A. Cushman
Samuel A. Cushman
This review provides an overview and integration of the use of resilience concepts to guide natural resources management actions. We emphasize ecosystems and landscapes and provide examples of the use of these concepts from empirical research in applied ecology. We begin with a discussion of definitions and concepts of ecological resilience and related terms that are applicable to management. We suggest that a resilience-based framework for management facilitates regional planning by providing the ability to locate management actions where they will have the greatest benefits and determine effective management strategies. We review the six key components of a resilience-based framework, beginning with managing for adaptive capacity and selecting an appropriate spatial extent and grain. Critical elements include developing an understanding of the factors influencing the general and ecological resilience of ecosystems and landscapes, the landscape context and spatial resilience, pattern and process interactions and their variability, and relationships among ecological and spatial resilience and the capacity to support habitats and species. We suggest that a spatially explicit approach, which couples geospatial information on general and spatial resilience to disturbance with information on resources, habitats, or species, provides the foundation for resilience-based management. We provide a case study from the sagebrush biome that illustrates the use of geospatial information on ecological and spatial resilience for prioritizing management actions and determine effective strategies.

26 September 2019 in Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JBJohn B. Bradford
John B. Bradford
DSDaniel R. Schlaepfer
Daniel R. Schlaepfer
WLWilliam K. Lauenroth
William K. Lauenroth
KPKyle A. Palmquist
Kyle A. Palmquist
JCJeanne C. Chambers
Jeanne C. Chambers
SCSteven B. Campbell
Steven B. Campbell
Assessing landscape patterns in climate vulnerability, as well as resilience and resistance to drought, disturbance, and invasive species, requires appropriate metrics of relevant environmental conditions. In dryland systems of western North America, soil temperature and moisture regimes have been widely utilized as an indicator of resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasive plant species by providing integrative indicators of long-term site aridity, which relates to ecosystem recovery potential and climatic suitability to invaders. However, the impact of climate change on these regimes, and the suitability of the indicator for estimating resistance and resilience in the context of climate change have not been assessed. Here we utilized a daily time-step, process-based, ecosystem water balance model to characterize current and future patterns in soil temperature and moisture conditions in dryland areas of western North America, and evaluate the impact of these changes on estimation of resilience and resistance. Soil temperature increases in the twenty-first century are substantial, relatively uniform geographically, and robust across climate models. Higher temperatures will expand the areas of mesic and thermic soil temperature regimes while decreasing the area of cryic and frigid temperature conditions. Projections for future precipitation are more variable both geographically and among climate models. Nevertheless, future soil moisture conditions are relatively consistent across climate models for much of the region. Projections of drier soils are expected in most of Arizona and New Mexico, as well as the central and southern U.S. Great Plains. By contrast, areas with projections of increasing soil moisture include northeastern Montana, southern Alberta and Saskatchewan, and many areas dominated by big sagebrush, particularly the Central and Northern Basin and Range and the Wyoming Basin ecoregions. In addition, many areas dominated by big sagebrush are expected to experience pronounced shifts toward cool season moisture, which will create more area with xeric moisture conditions and less area with ustic conditions. In addition to indicating widespread geographic shifts in the distribution of soil temperature and moisture regimes, our results suggest opportunities for enhancing the integration of these conditions into a quantitative framework for assessing climate change impacts on dryland ecosystem resilience and resistance that is responsive to long-term projections.

1 January 2019
Verified
Report
Closed access
PDF file
RMRichard F. Miller
Richard F. Miller
JCJeanne C. Chambers
Jeanne C. Chambers
LELouisa Evers
Louisa Evers
CWC. Jason Williams
C. Jason Williams
KSKeirith A. Snyder
Keirith A. Snyder
FPFred B. Pierson
Fred B. Pierson

26 January 2023 in Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JCJeanne C. Chambers
Jeanne C. Chambers
JBJessi L. Brown
Jessi L. Brown
JBJohn B. Bradford
John B. Bradford
DBDavid I. Board
David I. Board
SCSteven B. Campbell
Steven B. Campbell
AUAlexandra K. Urza
Alexandra K. Urza
Ecosystem transformations to altered or novel ecological states are accelerating across the globe. Indicators of ecological resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasion can aid in assessing risks and prioritizing areas for conservation and restoration. The sagebrush biome encompasses parts of 11 western states and is experiencing rapid transformations due to human population growth, invasive species, altered disturbance regimes, and climate change. We built on prior use of static soil moisture and temperature regimes to develop new, ecologically relevant and climate responsive indicators of both resilience and resistance. Our new indicators were based on climate and soil water availability variables derived from process-based ecohydrological models that allow predictions of future conditions. We asked: (1) Which variables best indicate resilience and resistance? (2) What are the relationships among the indicator variables and resilience and resistance categories? (3) How do patterns of resilience and resistance vary across the area? We assembled a large database (n = 24,045) of vegetation sample plots from regional monitoring programs and derived multiple climate and soil water availability variables for each plot from ecohydrological simulations. We used USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service National Soils Survey Information, Ecological Site Descriptions, and expert knowledge to develop and assign ecological types and resilience and resistance categories to each plot. We used random forest models to derive a set of 19 climate and water availability variables that best predicted resilience and resistance categories. Our models had relatively high multiclass accuracy (80% for resilience; 75% for resistance). Top indicator variables for both resilience and resistance included mean temperature, coldest month temperature, climatic water deficit, and summer and driest month precipitation. Variable relationships and patterns differed among ecoregions but reflected environmental gradients; low resilience and resistance were indicated by warm and dry conditions with high climatic water deficits, and moderately high to high resilience and resistance were characterized by cooler and moister conditions with low climatic water deficits. The new, ecologically-relevant indicators provide information on the vulnerability of resources and likely success of management actions, and can be used to develop new approaches and tools for prioritizing areas for conservation and restoration actions.

1 January 2017
Verified
Report
Closed access
PDF file
JCJeanne C. Chambers
Jeanne C. Chambers
JBJ.L. Beck
J.L. Beck
JBJ.B. Bradford
J.B. Bradford
JBJ. Bybee
J. Bybee
SCS. Campbell
S. Campbell
AWA. Wuenschel
A. Wuenschel

12 May 2022 in Ecosphere
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
LELisa Ellsworth
Lisa Ellsworth
BNBeth Newingham
Beth Newingham
SSS. E. Shaff
S. E. Shaff
CWC. L. Williams
C. L. Williams
ESEva Strand
Eva Strand
JCJeanne C. Chambers
Jeanne C. Chambers
Increased fire size and frequency coupled with annual grass invasion pose major challenges to sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) ecosystem conservation, which is currently focused on protecting sagebrush community composition and structure. A common strategy for mitigating potential fire is to use fuel treatments that alter the structure and amount of burnable material, thus reducing fire behavior and creating access points for fire suppression resources. While there is some recent information on the impacts of fuel treatments on ecological communities, we have little information on fuel treatment effectiveness at modifying fire behavior in sagebrush ecosystems. We present 10 years of data on fuel accumulation and the resultant modeled fire behavior in prescribed fire, mowed, herbicide (tebuthiuron or imazapic), and untreated control plots in the Sagebrush Treatment Evaluation Project (SageSTEP) network in the Great Basin, USA. Fuel data (i.e., aboveground burnable live and dead biomass) were collected in each treatment plot at Years 0 (pretreatment), 1, 2, 3, 6, and 10 posttreatment. We used the Fuel and Fire Tool fire behavior modeling program to test whether treatments impacted potential fire behavior. Prescribed fire initially removed 49% of the total fuel load and 75% of shrubs, and fuel loads remained reduced through Year 10. Mowing shifted fuels from the shrub canopy to the ground surface but did not change the total fuel amount. Prescribed fire and mowing increased herbaceous fuel by the second posttreatment year and that trend persisted through Year 10. Tebuthiuron treatments were ineffective at altering fuel loads. Imazapic suppressed herbaceous vegetation by 30% in Years 2 and 3 following treatment. The modified fuel beds in fire and mow treatments resulted in modeled flame lengths that were significantly lower than untreated control plots for the duration of the study, with shorter term reductions in reaction intensity and rate of spread. Understanding fuel treatment effectiveness will allow natural resource managers to evaluate trade‐offs between protecting wildlife habitat and reducing the potential for high‐intensity wildfire.