CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 189Remote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsForest ecology and management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 79 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Post-drought decline of the Amazon carbon sink.

Open access
Yang, Yan, Saatchi, Sassan S., Xu, Liang, Yu, Yifan, Choi, Sungho, Phillips, Nathan, Kennedy, Robert, Keller, Michael, Knyazikhin, Yuri, Myneni, Ranga B.·2018·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-018-05668-6PMC PMC6085357
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abstract Amazon forests have experienced frequent and severe droughts in the past two decades. However, little is known about the large-scale legacy of droughts on carbon stocks and dynamics of forests. Using systematic sampling of forest structure measured by LiDAR waveforms from 2003 to 2008, here we show a significant loss of carbon over the entire Amazon basin at a rate of 0.3 ± 0.2 (95% CI) PgC yr−1 after the 2005 mega-drought, which continued persistently over the next 3 years (2005–2008). The changes in forest structure, captured by average LiDAR forest height and converted to above ground biomass carbon density, show an average loss of 2.35 ± 1.80 MgC ha−1 a year after (2006) in the epicenter of the drought. With more frequent droughts expected in future, forests of Amazon may lose their role as a robust sink of carbon, leading to a significant positive climate feedback and exacerbating warming trends.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-018-05668-6

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Spatial patterns of rainfall and corresponding canopy structure changes in each climatic region. a Drought classification map derived from rainfall data82. b Interannual changes of top canopy structure (RH90) relative to RH90 in 2004 for each climatic region defined in panel a. The abbreviations ED, SD, MD, LD, and ND are regions of extreme drought, severe drought, moderate drought, light drought, and no drought. The purple line in panel a delineates the boundary of Amazon basin area. Non-tropical forests in panel a were colored in gray. The error bars in panel b stand for 95% confidence intervals. Estimations in panel b were derived from the spatial modeling with filled data gaps (SMF) method (see Methods)
Fig. 1 Spatial patterns of rainfall and corresponding canopy structure changes in each climatic region. a Drought classification map derived from rainfall data82. b Interannual changes of top canopy structure (RH90) relative to RH90 in 2004 for each climatic region defined in panel a. The abbreviations ED, SD, MD, LD, and ND are regions of extreme drought, severe drought, moderate drought, light drought, and no drought. The purple line in panel a delineates the boundary of Amazon basin area. Non-tropical forests in panel a were colored in gray. The error bars in panel b stand for 95% confidence intervals. Estimations in panel b were derived from the spatial modeling with filled data gaps (SMF) method (see Methods)CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 GLAS-derived biomass changes in Amazon. a Interannual above ground biomass (AGB) changes of regional means in five climatic regions (see Fig. 1a); b Interannual total carbon changes in North; c Interannual total carbon changes in South; d Interannual total carbon changes over the Amazon basin. The error bars (shaded area) stand for 95% confidence intervals. We combine regions LD and ND to be North, and regions ED, SD, and MD as South. The abbreviations ED, SD, MD, LD, and ND are regions of extreme drought, severe drought, moderate drought, light drought and no drought. All estimations in this figure were derived from the spatial modeling with filled data gaps (SMF) method (see Methods)
Fig. 2 GLAS-derived biomass changes in Amazon. a Interannual above ground biomass (AGB) changes of regional means in five climatic regions (see Fig. 1a); b Interannual total carbon changes in North; c Interannual total carbon changes in South; d Interannual total carbon changes over the Amazon basin. The error bars (shaded area) stand for 95% confidence intervals. We combine regions LD and ND to be North, and regions ED, SD, and MD as South. The abbreviations ED, SD, MD, LD, and ND are regions of extreme drought, severe drought, moderate drought, light drought and no drought. All estimations in this figure were derived from the spatial modeling with filled data gaps (SMF) method (see Methods)CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Net carbon change and emissions from fire and deforestation. a Classification map showing pixels with intact Amazon forests belonging to South and North, as well as fire and deforestation activities in tropical forests. b Annual contributions of fire and deforestation emissions compared to the net forest carbon change in the North region. c Annual contributions of fire and deforestation emissions compared to the net carbon change in the South region. d Cumulative contributions of net forest carbon change, fire and deforestation emissions in the South relative to the 2004 level. The colormap in panel a was generated using rainfall82, MODIS fire50 and Landsat51 products. Pixels were identified as fire or deforested when at least 1% of these land-use activities were detected during our observational period. In panels b-d, the positive sign indicates carbon emission to the atmosphere, and negative emission refers to carbon sink. The error bars in estimating emissions are at 95% confidence intervals
Fig. 3 Net carbon change and emissions from fire and deforestation. a Classification map showing pixels with intact Amazon forests belonging to South and North, as well as fire and deforestation activities in tropical forests. b Annual contributions of fire and deforestation emissions compared to the net forest carbon change in the North region. c Annual contributions of fire and deforestation emissions compared to the net carbon change in the South region. d Cumulative contributions of net forest carbon change, fire and deforestation emissions in the South relative to the 2004 level. The colormap in panel a was generated using rainfall82, MODIS fire50 and Landsat51 products. Pixels were identified as fire or deforested when at least 1% of these land-use activities were detected during our observational period. In panels b-d, the positive sign indicates carbon emission to the atmosphere, and negative emission refers to carbon sink. The error bars in estimating emissions are at 95% confidence intervalsCC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 80 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Cochran, W. G. Sampling Techniques 3rd edn (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1977).
  2. Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R. & Friedman, J. The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction (Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, 2013).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 189

Related

Metadata

Authors
Yang, Y., Saatchi, S. S., Xu, L., Yu, Y., Choi, S., Phillips, N., Kennedy, R., Keller, M., Knyazikhin, Y., & Myneni, R. B.
Affiliations
  • Boston University (US)
  • Jet Propulsion Laboratory (US)
  • Oregon State University (US)
  • US Forest Service (US)
Corresponding author
Yang, Yan
ORCID
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2018-08-09
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
3172-3172
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41467-018-05668-6
PMC
PMC6085357
OpenAlex
W2887158854
Cited by
189
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 1
FWCI
9.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OpenBU (Boston University) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  • California Institute of Technology
  • U.S. Geological Survey
  • Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Forest ecology and management
Keywords
Amazon drought, forest carbon loss, aboveground biomass, forest structure, climate feedbacks, forest carbon dynamics, Amazon basin

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review