Effects of contemporary land-use and land-cover change on the carbon balance of terrestrial ecosystems in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in land use and land cover (LULC) can have profound effects on terrestrial carbon dynamics, yet their effects on the global carbon budget remain uncertain. While land change impacts on ecosystem carbon dynamics have been the focus of numerous studies, few efforts have been based on observational data incorporating multiple ecosystem types spanning large geographic areas over long time horizons. In this study we use a variety of synoptic-scale remote sensing data to estimate the effect of LULC changes associated with urbanization, agricultural expansion and contraction, forest harvest, and wildfire on the carbon balance of terrestrial ecosystems (forest, grasslands, shrublands, and agriculture) in the conterminous United States (i.e. excluding Alaska and Hawaii) between 1973 and 2010. We estimate large net declines in the area of agriculture and forest, along with relatively small increases in grasslands and shrublands. The largest net change in any class was an estimated gain of 114 865 km2 of developed lands, an average rate of 3282 km2 yr−1. On average, US ecosystems sequestered carbon at an annual rate of 254 Tg C yr−1. In forest lands, the net sink declined by 35% over the study period, largely a result of land-use legacy, increasing disturbances, and reductions in forest area due to land use conversion. Uncertainty in LULC change data contributed to a ~16% margin of error in the annual carbon sink estimate prior to 1985 (approximately ±40 Tg C yr−1). Improvements in LULC and disturbance mapping starting in the mid-1980s reduced this uncertainty by ~50% after 1985. We conclude that changes in LULC are a critical component to understanding ecosystem carbon dynamics, and continued improvements in detection, quantification, and attribution of change have the potential to significantly reduce current uncertainties.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".