Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Disentangling biology from mathematical necessity in twentieth-century gymnosperm resilience trends

Matters Arising to this article was published on 05 April 2021

The Original Article was published on 15 June 2020

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type



Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Comparison of resilience and resistance measures using the indices employed by Li versus Lloret.

Data availability

Raw tree ring width data were obtained from the ITRDB (version 7.15) at Gridded standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index data (SPEIbase version 2.5) with a spatial resolution of 0.5° were obtained from

Code avilability

All statistical analyses were conducted in R (version 3.5.1) using the following libraries: lme4, lmerTest, MuMIn, performance, bestNormalize, emmeans, dplR, SPEI, ncdf4, effects, Taxonstand and taxonlookup. Additional R code is available at


  1. Li, X. et al. Temporal trade-off between gymnosperm resistance and resilience increases forest sensitivity to extreme drought. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1075–1083 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Goulden, M. L. & Bales, R. C. California forest die-off linked to multi-year deep soil drying in 2012–2015 drought. Nat. Geosci. 12, 632–637 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hodgson, D., McDonald, J. L. & Hosken, D. J. What do you mean, ‘resilient’? Trends Ecol. Evol. 30, 503–506 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lloret, F., Keeling, E. G. & Sala, A. Components of tree resilience: effects of successive low-growth episodes in old ponderosa pine forests. Oikos 120, 1909–1920 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhao, S. et al. The International Tree-Ring Data Bank (ITRDB) revisited: data availability and global ecological representativity. J. Biogeogr. 46, 355–368 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Isbell, F. et al. Biodiversity increases the resistance of ecosystem productivity to climate extremes. Nature 526, 574–577 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ingrisch, J. & Bahn, M. Towards a comparable quantification of resilience. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 251–259 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Van der Maaten-Theunissen, M., van der Maaten, E. & Bouriaud, O. pointRes: an R package to analyze pointer years and components of resilience. Dendrochronologia 35, 34–38 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gazol, A. et al. Forest resilience to drought varies across biomes. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 2143–2158 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Serra-Maluquer, X., Mencuccini, M. & Martínez-Vilalta, J. Changes in tree resistance, recovery and resilience across three successive extreme droughts in the northeast Iberian Peninsula. Oecologia 187, 343–354 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. DeSoto, L. et al. Low growth resilience to drought is related to future mortality risk in trees. Nat. Commun. 11, 545 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Anderegg, W. R. L., Anderegg, L. D. L., Kerr, K. L. & Trugman, A. T. Widespread drought‐induced tree mortality at dry range edges indicates that climate stress exceeds species’ compensating mechanisms. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 3793–3802 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sperry, J. S. et al. The impact of rising CO2 and acclimation on the response of US forests to global warming. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 25734–25744 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Peterson, R. A. & Cavanaugh, J. E. Ordered quantile normalization: a semiparametric transformation built for the cross-validation era. J. Appl. Stat. 47, 2312–2327 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



T.Z., M.M., R.G.-V., J.J.C. and J.M.-V. designed the study. A.G. provided the ITRDB database. T.Z. and M.M. analysed the data with input from J.M.-V. and R.G.-V. T.Z. and M.M. wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors contributed substantially to revisions.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maurizio Mencuccini.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature Ecology & Evolution thanks Nate Mcdowell and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Methods, Discussion, Figs. 1 and 2 and Tables 1 and 2.

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Data

Supplementary Data 1 and 2: resilience datasets.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zheng, T., Martínez-Vilalta, J., García-Valdés, R. et al. Disentangling biology from mathematical necessity in twentieth-century gymnosperm resilience trends. Nat Ecol Evol 5, 733–735 (2021).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing