The limited contribution of large trees to annual biomass production in an old‐growth tropical forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the importance of large trees regarding biodiversity and carbon stock in old-growth forests is undeniable, their annual contribution to biomass production and carbon uptake remains poorly studied at the stand level. To clarify the role of large trees in biomass production, we used data of tree growth, mortality, and recruitment monitored during 20 yr in 10 4-ha plots in a species-rich tropical forest (Central African Republic). Using a random block design, three different silvicultural treatments, control, logged, and logged + thinned, were applied in the 10 plots. Annual biomass gains and losses were analyzed in relation to the relative biomass abundance of large trees and by tree size classes using a spatial bootstrap procedure. Although large trees had high individual growth rates and constituted a substantial amount of biomass, stand-level biomass production decreased with the abundance of large trees in all treatments and plots. The contribution of large trees to annual stand-level biomass production appeared limited in comparison to that of small trees. This pattern did not only originate from differences in abundance of small vs. large trees or differences in initial biomass stocks among tree size classes, but also from a reduced relative growth rate of large trees and a relatively constant mortality rate among tree size classes. In a context in which large trees are increasingly gaining attention as being a valuable and a key structural characteristic of natural forests, the present study brought key insights to better gauge the relatively limited role of large trees in annual stand-level biomass production. In terms of carbon uptake, these results suggest, as already demonstrated, a low net carbon uptake of old-growth forests in comparison to that of logged forests. Tropical forests that reach a successional stage with relatively high density of large trees progressively cease to be carbon sinks as large trees contribute sparsely or even negatively to the carbon uptake at the stand level.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".