Quote:
Originally Posted by magicinterest
That makes zero sense - if the Holdridge model indeed says that, then it's inconsistent and can be dismissed offhand here - Hawaii lies below the tropic of cancer. None of it's vegetation is remotely seasonal. It has a tropical climate. If the forests of far southern China are tropical in nature, than the forests in the southern Florida and Hawaii are tropical rainforests. I get nitpicking Florida - but calling Hawaiian forests "subtropical" when they're listed as tropical rainforest by the WWF? That's stupid. There is nothing else to call them but subtropical. They aren't climatically, geographically, or ecologically "subtropical" at all.
Tropical vegetation is not confined to the equatorial region at all, so that doesn't make sense.
EDIT: Looking at the Holdridge Life Zones, it appears that nowhere in China is labeled as having "tropical forest" either, despite the presence of legitimate tropical forests in southern Yunnan and on Hainan island. This seems to be a quirk of this classification.
The vegetation of southern Florida is not deciduous at all, and tropical/subtropical species predominate. Holdridge labels forests in southern Virginia and in Arkansas subtropical.
If the climate of southern Florida is tropical, so is the ecology. You don't have coconut palms in stranglers figs without true tropical forest.
Alaska has a polar climate in it's north. You have, essentially, subarctic/arctic desert in areas of middle Alaska. The phrase "ice desert" doesn't really make sense.
|
1. “That makes zero sense - if the Holdridge model indeed says that, then it's inconsistent and can be dismissed offhand here”
Why is that? Both Holdridge and Koppen are valid “not perfect” systems to classify climate “koppen” and biomes “Holdridge”, the difference regarding the usage of the Word “Tropical” is the temperature limits each model employ.
For Koppen a tropical climate needs all 12 months of the year have average temperatures of 18 °C, for Holdridge the temperatura to be considered a tropical biome is 24 °C. Subtropical vegetation would need a temperatura ranging from 18 °C to 24 °C. There are some koppen moddified models that make the distinction between tropical and equatorial that take the same approach of Holdridge in temperature “The terminology changes: equatorial climate = tropical vegetation, Tropical climate = Sub tropical vegetation”
2. “Hawaii lies below the tropic of cancer. None of it's vegetation is remotely seasonal”
Irrelevant, Florida is north of the tropic of cáncer and yet it has “according to koppen” a tropical climate.
You must remember that Hawaii southernmost point is located in 18.9111°N, that’s about 2200 km from the equator “almost as long as the continental territory of the US”, so you can’t expect to have the same climate and vegetation to regións of the world closer to the equator.
That is why Mauna Kea can get snow in Winter, there is a seasonal change “altought not as stark as those found at higher latitudes.
A perfectly good example of this are the alpine regions within the tropics. The ones closer to the equator “the paramos of the norhtern tropical andes and the southern portion of central america in Costa Rica, Panama, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador and northern peru; the highlands of Eastern africa and the mountains in new guinea share similar characteristics and are a completely different biome than those found at higher latitudes within the tropics “the zacatonales of Mexico and Guatemala, the puna of the dry central andes in peru, Bolivia, northern argenina and northern chile, the highlands of Hawaii”
3. “It has a tropical climate”
I Agree, but not equatorial
4. “If the forests of far southern China are tropical in nature, than the forests in the southern Florida and Hawaii are tropical rainforests.”
I didnt mention China, but considering that Hainan island southernmost point is at 18°09′33″N then it has a tropical “not equatorial” climate according to Koppen and subtropical vegetation according to Holdridge.
5. “I get nitpicking Florida - but calling Hawaiian forests "subtropical" when they're listed as tropical rainforest by the WWF? That's stupid. There is nothing else to call them but subtropical. They aren't climatically, geographically, or ecologically "subtropical" at all.”
First, if we use the classification of the WWF there is no “tropical rainforest”, what they have is “Tropical and subtropical moist broadleaf forests” and in that term they put together a lot of different types of biomes.
Secondly WWF classification is very generic, if you want to get more “technical” and use a model that actually uses the term “tropical rainforest”, instead of being stupid “your own words”, then I recommend Holdridge.
The WWF’S Tropical and subtropical moist broadleaf forests is in fact 15 different biomes “tropical moist forest, tropical wet forest, tropical rain forest, tropical premontane moist forest, tropical premontane wet forest, tropical premontane rain forest, tropical lower montane moist forest, tropical lower montane wet forest, tropical lower montane rain forest, subtropical moist forest, subtropical wet forest, subtropical rain forest, subtropical lower montane moist forest, subtropical lower montane wet forest, subtropical lower montane rain forest”
6. “Tropical vegetation is not confined to the equatorial region at all, so that doesn't make sense. “
it could be a valid point if there is a system that changes the terminology, as long as it makes the distinction between the biomes closet to the equator and those “tropical” biomes that are not closet o the equator
7. “EDIT: Looking at the Holdridge Life Zones, it appears that nowhere in China is labeled as having "tropical forest" either, despite the presence of legitimate tropical forests in southern Yunnan and on Hainan island. This seems to be a quirk of this classification.”
Again where did I mention China?
8. “Alaska has a polar climate in it's north. You have, essentially, subarctic/arctic desert in areas of middle Alaska. The phrase "ice desert" doesn't really make sense”
the term ice desert do exist in the Holdridge’s model, its equivalent to koppen ice cap climate, be it a true EF climate “ice cap formed at sea level” or EFH climate “Highland ice cap”, Alaska has the more modarate ET climate “tundra” and only “at higher elevation does it have a EFH climate” just like the alps, andes, himalayas, and other mountans high enough to allow the formation of glaciers
https://data.fs.usda.gov/research/pu...iitf_gtr48.pdf
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
