MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415950249 · doi:10.5194/cp-21-2031-2025

Holocene land cover change in North America: continental trends, regional drivers, and implications for vegetation–atmosphere feedbacks

2025· article· en· W4415950249 on OpenAlexafffund
Andria Dawson, John W. Williams, Marie‐José Gaillard, Simon Goring, Behnaz Pirzamanbein, Johan Lindström, R. Scott Anderson, Andrea Brunelle, David R. Foster, Konrad Gajewski, Daniel G. Gavin, Terri Lacourse, Thomas A. Minckley, Wyatt Oswald, Bryan N. Shuman, Cathy Whitlock

Bibliographic record

VenueClimate of the past · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsCentre de Géomatique du QuébecMount Royal UniversityUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChinese Academy of SciencesSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHoloceneLand coverHolocene climatic optimumClimate changeAfforestationLand useBiogeochemical cycleEnvironmental change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Land cover governs the biogeophysical and biogeochemical feedbacks between the land surface and atmosphere. Holocene vegetation–atmosphere interactions are of particular interest, both to understand the climate effects of intensifying human land use and as a possible explanation for the Holocene temperature conundrum, a widely studied mismatch between simulated and reconstructed temperatures. Progress has been limited by a lack of data-constrained, quantified, and consistently produced reconstructions of Holocene land cover change. As a contribution to the Past Global Changes (PAGES) LandCover6k Working Group, we present a new suite of land cover reconstructions with uncertainty for North America, based on a network of 1445 sedimentary pollen records and the REVEALS pollen–vegetation model (PVM) coupled with a Bayesian spatial model. These spatially comprehensive land cover maps are then used to determine the pattern and magnitude of North American land cover changes at continental to regional scales. Early Holocene afforestation in North America was driven by rising temperatures and deglaciation, and this afforestation likely amplified early Holocene warming via the albedo effect. A continental-scale mid-Holocene peak in summergreen trees and shrubs (8.5 to 4 ka) is hypothesized to represent a positive and understudied feedback loop among insolation, temperature, and phenology. A last-millennium decrease in summergreen trees and shrubs with corresponding increases in open land was likely driven by a spatially varying combination of intensifying land use and neoglacial cooling. Land cover trends vary within and across regions, due to individualistic taxon-level responses to environmental change. Major species-level events, such as the mid-Holocene decline in Tsuga canadensis (eastern hemlock), may have altered regional climates. The substantial land cover changes reconstructed here support the importance of biogeophysical and biogeochemical vegetation feedbacks to Holocene climate–carbon dynamics. However, recent model experiments that invoke vegetation feedbacks to explain the Holocene temperature conundrum may have overestimated land cover forcing by replacing Northern Hemisphere grasslands >30° N with forests, an ecosystem state that is not supported by these land cover reconstructions. These Holocene reconstructions for North America, along with similar LandCover6k products now available for other continents, serve the Earth system modeling community by providing better-constrained land cover scenarios and benchmarks for model evaluation, ultimately making it possible to better understand the regional- to global-scale processes driving Holocene land cover, carbon cycle, and climate dynamics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClimate of the pastSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207