| Literature DB >> 24643258 |
Fernando D B Espírito-Santo1, Manuel Gloor2, Michael Keller3, Yadvinder Malhi4, Sassan Saatchi5, Bruce Nelson6, Raimundo C Oliveira Junior7, Cleuton Pereira, Jon Lloyd8, Steve Frolking9, Michael Palace9, Yosio E Shimabukuro10, Valdete Duarte10, Abel Monteagudo Mendoza11, Gabriela López-González2, Tim R Baker2, Ted R Feldpausch12, Roel J W Brienen2, Gregory P Asner13, Doreen S Boyd14, Oliver L Phillips2.
Abstract
Forest inventory studies in the Amazon indicate a large terrestrial carbon sink. However, field plots may fail to represent forest mortality processes at landscape-scales of tropical forests. Here we characterize the frequency distribution of disturbance events in natural forests from 0.01 ha to 2,651 ha size throughout Amazonia using a novel combination of forest inventory, airborne lidar and satellite remote sensing data. We find that small-scale mortality events are responsible for aboveground biomass losses of ~1.7 Pg C y(-1) over the entire Amazon region. We also find that intermediate-scale disturbances account for losses of ~0.2 Pg C y(-1), and that the largest-scale disturbances as a result of blow-downs only account for losses of ~0.004 Pg C y(-1). Simulation of growth and mortality indicates that even when all carbon losses from intermediate and large-scale disturbances are considered, these are outweighed by the net biomass accumulation by tree growth, supporting the inference of an Amazon carbon sink.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24643258 PMCID: PMC4273466 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms4434
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Figure 1Amazon Basin-wide data of natural forest disturbances.
(a) Spatial distribution of RAINFOR forest census plots10 (n=135), inspected Landsat images (n=137) with occurrences of large blow-down disturbances ≥30 ha (ref. 26) (black boxes, n=330 blow-downs) and ≥5 ha (ref. 25) (yellow dots, n=279 blow-downs) underlain by an ABG map of the Amazon. White, yellow and turquoise in (a) indicate the Brazilian border, the mosaic of Landsat images in the Central Amazon25 (as shown in (d)), and the lidar airborne campaigns in Peru24, respectively. (b) Large forest inventory plot of 114 ha (ref. 23) with ground gaps (yellow polygons, n=55) overlain on a high-resolution IKONOS-2 image acquired in 2008 in the Eastern Amazon. (c) Large plot of 53 ha (ref. 23) with ground gaps (n=51) over a second high-resolution IKONOS-2 image acquired in 2009. (d) Digitally classified blow-downs in an East-West mosaic of Landsat images from the Central Amazon. (e) Representation of disturbance size areas found in all Landsat images—blow-downs disturbances ≥30 ha areas are proportional to the size of the circles. (f) Location of the lidar airborne campaigns in the Southern Peruvian Amazon24 (turquoise box). (g) Lidar data collections in four large transects of tropical forest (48,374 ha, n=30,130 gaps ≥20 m2 in erosional terra firme and depositional forests). (h) Details of the detection of gaps in lidar canopy height model (CHM)—a 2 m height threshold was used to detect tree-fall gaps in CHM (h). Composite in (b) and (c) means colour compositions of IKONOS-2 image at full-width wavelength for three bands: (2) green 0.51–0.60 μm, (3) red 0.63–0.70 μm and (4) NIR 0.76–0.85 μm. Dashed blue lines in Landsat images (d) and central Brazilian Amazon (e) divides the areas with high frequency of blow-downs (≥5 ha) between 58°00′W and 66°49′W (western Amazon) and where blow-downs are infrequent in the eastern basin (51°51′W to 58°00′W). Legends of scale-bar for all areas (a–h) are 500km, 0.2km, 0.2km, 90km, 500km, 572km, 45km and 0.5 km, respectively.
Figure 2Spatial distribution of large disturbances in the Brazilian Amazon.
Cluster map of blow-downs of Brazilian Amazon using a Gaussian smoothing kernel28 with bandwidth of 200 km modelled from 330 large disturbances ≥30 ha detected in 137 Landsat images over the Amazon region26. Colour bar is the intensity of large disturbances in the Amazon (number of blow-downs per km2). Legend of scalebar for the map of blow-down density is 500 km.
Figure 3Estimated frequency distributions of natural forest disturbances in the Amazon.
(a) Number of disturbances per year obtained by scaling observed events to the full Amazon region by multiplication with the inverse of observed area fraction. Number density of disturbances per year obtained from a histogram and dividing the resulting numbers by histogram bin-width. Bin-widths are chosen such as to include at least one event; the number density follows approximately Δlog (number of occurrences)/Δlog (disturbance size)≈−2.5. (b) Return intervals versus severity of events calculated using the inverse of the cumulative PDF (see Methods) for various combinations of the data from repeated plot measurements, lidar surveys and Landsat imagery. For (a) and (b) largest blow-downs (those detected by Landsat imagery) are scaled to the region by multiplication of Amazon area fraction with large blow-downs. Panels (c) and (d) are similar to (a) and (b) but with respect to disturbance biomass loss instead of disturbance area. In (b,d) solid lines correspond to the case where large blow-downs are included only in the Central Amazon while the dashed lines correspond to the case where largest blow-downs are assumed to occur everywhere in the region (as a sensitivity study) and similarly the dashed light blue line corresponds to the case where also floodplain lidar data with river-driven disturbances are included (note that the forest plot network is based overwhelmingly on non-floodplain plots).
Summary of Amazon forest simulator results.
| — | 0.85 | — | |
| — | 4.40 | — | |
| — | 2.24 | — | |
| — | 7.59 | — | |
| 0.94 | 0.94 | ||
| 2.19 | 12.4 | ||
| 4.99 | 0.88 | ||
| 16.9 | 2.98 | ||
Mean and statistical significance of simulated AGB gains for a range of scenarios. We vary occurrence of large-disturbance blow-downs2526, that is, the large-end tail of the disturbance frequency distribution, and age of intermediate-range disturbances. For blow-downs we distinguish three cases: (i) no large-disturbance blow-downs2526, (ii) large blow-downs as observed only in central Amazon (~20% of the Amazon region), (iii) everywhere in the Amazon with the same frequency of events as in the central Amazon (that is, with five times more large-area events than observed). For intermediate-range disturbances we distinguish disturbances occurring across the entire Amazon region distributed according to lidar surveys24 (plots 1, 4, 5 and 12) of erosional terra firme (ETF) forests (33,196 ha) with either a mean gap age of 1 or 3.6 years based on gap closure observations of a 50 ha plot on Barro Colorado Island30. We assumed an annual mean mass gain (G) (live tree mass gains plus mass gains due to recruitment81011) of 2.5 Mg C ha−1 y−1 in areas of terra firme forests. The simulator of forest mortality (D) is based on the frequency distribution of disturbance area. To convert area losses to biomass losses we assumed a forest mass density of 170 Mg C ha−1 for all simulations, a high value and ~50% greater than the actual biomass density in the lidar landscape in southern Peru used to estimate intermediate disturbance dynamics811. Assessment of each scenario is based on a set of 109 annual equivalent samples. The most credible results are in highlighted bold.
*Significance is assessed with a t-test considering tsim=(dM/dt)/(σ/sqrt(N)) where dM/dt is ensemble mean mass gain (Mg C ha−1 y−1), σ the s.d. of the mass gain distribution and N the number of observations.
For N we use the RAINFOR sample published in 2009, either conservatively N=135, the total number of observational plots or N=1,545, the total number of plot census years, reflecting the stochastic nature of disturbance and therefore the near independence of plot results from year-to-year. Net gain results are statistically significant at the 95% level if tsim≥t(0.975,≈t(0.975,=1.96 and at the 99% level if tsim≥t(0.995,≈t(0.995,=2.58.