MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200372885 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac45b3

Aboveground forest biomass varies across continents, ecological zones and successional stages: refined IPCC default values for tropical and subtropical forests

2021· article· en· W4200372885 on OpenAlexaff
Danaë M. A. Rozendaal, Daniela Requena Suárez, Veronique De Sy, Valerio Avitabile, Sarah Carter, C.Y. Adou Yao, Esteban Álvarez‐Dávila, Kristina J. Anderson‐Teixeira, Alejandro Araujo‐Murakami, Luzmila Arroyo, Benjamin Barca, Timothy R. Baker, Luca Birigazzi, Frans Bongers, Anne Branthomme, Roel Brienen, João M. B. Carreiras, Roberto Cazzolla Gatti, Susan C. Cook‐Patton, Mathieu Decuyper, Ben DeVries, Andrés B. Espejo, Ted R. Feldpausch, Julian C. Fox, Javier G. P. Gamarra, Bronson W. Griscom, Nancy L. Harris, Bruno Hérault, Eurídice N. Honorio Coronado, Inge Jonckheere, Eric Konan, Sara M. Leavitt, Simon L. Lewis, Jeremy Lindsell, Justin Kassi N’Dja, Anny Estelle N’Guessan, Beatriz Schwantes Marimon, Edward T. A. Mitchard, Abel Monteagudo, A. Morel, Anssi Pekkarinen, Oliver L. Phillips, Lourens Poorter, Lan Qie, Ervan Rutishauser, Casey M. Ryan, Maurizio Santoro, Dos Santos Silayo, Plínio Sist, Ferry Slik, Bonaventure Sonké, Martin J. P. Sullivan, Gaia Vaglio Laurin, Emilio Vilanova, Maria M. H. Wang, Eliakimu Zahabu, Martin Herold

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsNetwork for Business SustainabilityUniversity of Guelph
FundersJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersDirektoratet for UtviklingssamarbeidConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoDoris Duke Charitable FoundationSight Research UKBundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und ReaktorsicherheitNational Centre for Earth ObservationGordon and Betty Moore FoundationChildren's Investment Fund FoundationNatural Environment Research CouncilCOmON StichtingEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsSubtropicsTropicsEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)Tropical and subtropical moist broadleaf forestsGreenhouse gasClimate changeEcologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For monitoring and reporting forest carbon stocks and fluxes, many countries in the tropics and subtropics rely on default values of forest aboveground biomass (AGB) from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventories. Default IPCC forest AGB values originated from 2006, and are relatively crude estimates of average values per continent and ecological zone. The 2006 default values were based on limited plot data available at the time, methods for their derivation were not fully clear, and no distinction between successional stages was made. As part of the 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for GHG Inventories, we updated the default AGB values for tropical and subtropical forests based on AGB data from >25 000 plots in natural forests and a global AGB map where no plot data were available. We calculated refined AGB default values per continent, ecological zone, and successional stage, and provided a measure of uncertainty. AGB in tropical and subtropical forests varies by an order of magnitude across continents, ecological zones, and successional stage. Our refined default values generally reflect the climatic gradients in the tropics, with more AGB in wetter areas. AGB is generally higher in old-growth than in secondary forests, and higher in older secondary (regrowth >20 years old and degraded/logged forests) than in young secondary forests (⩽20 years old). While refined default values for tropical old-growth forest are largely similar to the previous 2006 default values, the new default values are 4.0–7.7-fold lower for young secondary forests. Thus, the refined values will strongly alter estimated carbon stocks and fluxes, and emphasize the critical importance of old-growth forest conservation. We provide a reproducible approach to facilitate future refinements and encourage targeted efforts to establish permanent plots in areas with data gaps.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207