Literature DB >> 26840632

Biomass resilience of Neotropical secondary forests.

Lourens Poorter1, Frans Bongers1, T Mitchell Aide2, Angélica M Almeyda Zambrano3, Patricia Balvanera4, Justin M Becknell5, Vanessa Boukili6, Pedro H S Brancalion7, Eben N Broadbent3, Robin L Chazdon6, Dylan Craven8,9,10, Jarcilene S de Almeida-Cortez11, George A L Cabral11, Ben H J de Jong12, Julie S Denslow13, Daisy H Dent14,15, Saara J DeWalt16, Juan M Dupuy17, Sandra M Durán18, Mario M Espírito-Santo19, María C Fandino20, Ricardo G César7, Jefferson S Hall8, José Luis Hernandez-Stefanoni17, Catarina C Jakovac1,21, André B Junqueira22,23,24, Deborah Kennard25, Susan G Letcher26, Juan-Carlos Licona27, Madelon Lohbeck1,28, Erika Marín-Spiotta29, Miguel Martínez-Ramos4, Paulo Massoca21, Jorge A Meave30, Rita Mesquita21, Francisco Mora4,30, Rodrigo Muñoz30, Robert Muscarella31,32, Yule R F Nunes19, Susana Ochoa-Gaona12, Alexandre A de Oliveira33, Edith Orihuela-Belmonte12, Marielos Peña-Claros1, Eduardo A Pérez-García30, Daniel Piotto34, Jennifer S Powers35,36, Jorge Rodríguez-Velázquez4, I Eunice Romero-Pérez30, Jorge Ruíz37,38, Juan G Saldarriaga, Arturo Sanchez-Azofeifa18, Naomi B Schwartz31, Marc K Steininger, Nathan G Swenson39, Marisol Toledo27, Maria Uriarte31, Michiel van Breugel8,40,41, Hans van der Wal42, Maria D M Veloso19, Hans F M Vester43,44, Alberto Vicentini21, Ima C G Vieira45, Tony Vizcarra Bentos21, G Bruce Williamson21,46, Danaë M A Rozendaal1,6,47.   

Abstract

Land-use change occurs nowhere more rapidly than in the tropics, where the imbalance between deforestation and forest regrowth has large consequences for the global carbon cycle. However, considerable uncertainty remains about the rate of biomass recovery in secondary forests, and how these rates are influenced by climate, landscape, and prior land use. Here we analyse aboveground biomass recovery during secondary succession in 45 forest sites and about 1,500 forest plots covering the major environmental gradients in the Neotropics. The studied secondary forests are highly productive and resilient. Aboveground biomass recovery after 20 years was on average 122 megagrams per hectare (Mg ha(-1)), corresponding to a net carbon uptake of 3.05 Mg C ha(-1) yr(-1), 11 times the uptake rate of old-growth forests. Aboveground biomass stocks took a median time of 66 years to recover to 90% of old-growth values. Aboveground biomass recovery after 20 years varied 11.3-fold (from 20 to 225 Mg ha(-1)) across sites, and this recovery increased with water availability (higher local rainfall and lower climatic water deficit). We present a biomass recovery map of Latin America, which illustrates geographical and climatic variation in carbon sequestration potential during forest regrowth. The map will support policies to minimize forest loss in areas where biomass resilience is naturally low (such as seasonally dry forest regions) and promote forest regeneration and restoration in humid tropical lowland areas with high biomass resilience.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26840632     DOI: 10.1038/nature16512

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


  63 in total

1.  Forest age improves understanding of the global carbon sink.

Authors:  Kai Zhu; Yiluan Song; Clara Qin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-02-19       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Restoring natural forests is the best way to remove atmospheric carbon.

Authors:  Simon L Lewis; Charlotte E Wheeler; Edward T A Mitchard; Alexander Koch
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Lianas do not reduce tree biomass accumulation in young successional tropical dry forests.

Authors:  Sergio Estrada-Villegas; Jefferson S Hall; Michiel van Breugel; Stefan A Schnitzer
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2021-03-06       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Direct effects of selection on aboveground biomass contrast with indirect structure-mediated effects of complementarity in a subtropical forest.

Authors:  Diego Ismael Rodríguez-Hernández; David C Deane; Weitao Wang; Yongfa Chen; Buhang Li; Wenqi Luo; Chengjin Chu
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2021-04-18       Impact factor: 3.225

5.  Ancient human disturbances may be skewing our understanding of Amazonian forests.

Authors:  Crystal N H McMichael; Frazer Matthews-Bird; William Farfan-Rios; Kenneth J Feeley
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Drought-induced Amazonian wildfires instigate a decadal-scale disruption of forest carbon dynamics.

Authors:  Camila V J Silva; Luiz E O C Aragão; Jos Barlow; Fernando Espirito-Santo; Paul J Young; Liana O Anderson; Erika Berenguer; Izaias Brasil; I Foster Brown; Bruno Castro; Renato Farias; Joice Ferreira; Filipe França; Paulo M L A Graça; Letícia Kirsten; Aline P Lopes; Cleber Salimon; Marcos Augusto Scaranello; Marina Seixas; Fernanda C Souza; Haron A M Xaud
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-10-08       Impact factor: 6.237

7.  Temperature accelerates the rate fields become forests.

Authors:  Jason D Fridley; Justin P Wright
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 8.  Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges.

Authors:  Nathalie Seddon; Alexandre Chausson; Pam Berry; Cécile A J Girardin; Alison Smith; Beth Turner
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2020-01-27       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  When will the Amazon hit a tipping point?

Authors:  Ignacio Amigo
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Nitrogen-fixing trees inhibit growth of regenerating Costa Rican rainforests.

Authors:  Benton N Taylor; Robin L Chazdon; Benedicte Bachelot; Duncan N L Menge
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-07-31       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.