10.6084/m9.figshare.1011687.v1 Sebastian Wolf Sebastian Wolf Lutz Merbold Lutz Merbold Dennis Imer Dennis Imer Jacqueline Stieger Jacqueline Stieger Rebecca Hiller Rebecca Hiller Sebastian Zielis Sebastian Zielis Matthias Häni Matthias Häni Christof Ammann Christof Ammann Werner Eugster Werner Eugster Nina Buchmann Nina Buchmann Swiss FluxNet sites used in this synthesis study IOP Publishing 2013 gpp spring drought ecosystem lowland grassland sites water vapour fluxes et spring phenological development Swiss FluxNet data wue mat IGBP European summer heat wave Environmental Science 2013-07-03 00:00:00 Dataset https://iop.figshare.com/articles/dataset/___Swiss_FluxNet_sites_used_in_this_synthesis_study/1011687 <p><b>Table 1.</b>  Swiss FluxNet sites used in this synthesis study. Abbreviations denote the International Geosphere–Biosphere Programme (IGBP), mean annual temperature (MAT), mean annual precipitation (MAP), and friction velocity (<em>u</em><sub></sub>)—a measure for turbulence conditions. Data were compiled from published literature except MAP, which was derived from long-term data provided by MeteoSwiss (see table <a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/3/035007/article#erl466080t2" target="_blank">2</a>). </p> <p><strong>Abstract</strong></p> <p>Since the European summer heat wave of 2003, considerable attention has been paid to the impacts of exceptional weather events on terrestrial ecosystems. While our understanding of the effects of summer drought on ecosystem carbon and water vapour fluxes has recently advanced, the effects of spring drought remain unclear. In Switzerland, spring 2011 (March–May) was the warmest and among the driest since the beginning of meteorological measurements. This study synthesizes Swiss FluxNet data from three grassland and two forest ecosystems to investigate the effects of this spring drought. Across all sites, spring phenological development was 11 days earlier in 2011 compared to the mean of 2000–2011. Soil moisture related reductions of gross primary productivity (GPP) were found at the lowland grassland sites, where productivity did not recover following grass cuts. In contrast, spring GPP was enhanced at the montane grassland and both forests (mixed deciduous and evergreen). Evapotranspiration (ET) was reduced in forests, which also substantially increased their water-use efficiency (WUE) during spring drought, but not in grasslands. These contrasting responses to spring drought of grasslands compared to forests reflect different adaptive strategies between vegetation types, highly relevant to biosphere–atmosphere feedbacks in the climate system.</p>