The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Productivity of forests in the Eurosiberian boreal region and their potential to act as a carbon sink –‐ a synthesis
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Based on review and original data, this synthesis investigates carbon pools and fluxes of Siberian and European forests (600 and 300 million ha, respectively). We examine the productivity of ecosystems, expressed as positive rate when the amount of carbon in the ecosystem increases, while (following micrometeorological convention) downward fluxes from the atmosphere to the vegetation (NEE = Net Ecosystem Exchange) are expressed as negative numbers. Productivity parameters are Net Primary Productivity (NPP=whole plant growth), Net Ecosystem Productivity (NEP = CO 2 assimilation minus ecosystem respiration), and Net Biome Productivity (NBP = NEP minus carbon losses through disturbances bypassing respiration, e.g. by fire and logging). Based on chronosequence studies and national forestry statistics we estimate a low average NPP for boreal forests in Siberia: 123 gC m–2 y–1. This contrasts with a similar calculation for Europe which suggests a much higher average NPP of 460 gC m–2 y–1 for the forests there. Despite a smaller area, European forests have a higher total NPP than Siberia (1.2–1.6 vs. 0.6–0.9 × 10 15 gC region–1 y–1). This arises as a consequence of differences in growing season length, climate and nutrition. For a chronosequence of Pinus sylvestris stands studied in central Siberia during summer, NEE was most negative in a 67‐y old stand regenerating after fire (– 192 mmol m–2 d–1) which is close to NEE in a cultivated forest of Germany (– 210 mmol m–2 d–1). Considerable net ecosystem CO 2‐uptake was also measured in Siberia in 200‐ and 215‐y old stands (NEE:174 and – 63 mmol m–2 d–1) while NEP of 7‐ and 13‐y old logging areas were close to the ecosystem compensation point. Two Siberian bogs and a bog in European Russia were also significant carbon sinks (– 102 to – 104 mmol m–2 d–1). Integrated over a growing season (June to September) we measured a total growing season NEE of – 14 mol m–2 summer–1 (– 168 gC m–2 summer–1) in a 200‐y Siberian pine stand and – 5 mol m–2 summer–1 (– 60 gC m–2 summer–1) in Siberian and European Russian bogs. By contrast, over the same period, a spruce forest in European Russia was a carbon source to the atmosphere of (NEE: + 7 mol m–2 summer–1 = + 84 gC m–2 summer–1). Two years after a windthrow in European Russia, with all trees being uplifted and few successional species, lost 16 mol C m–2 to the atmosphere over a 3‐month in summer, compared to the cumulative NEE over a growing season in a German forest of – 15.5 mol m–2 summer–1 (– 186 gC m–2 summer–1; European flux network annual averaged – 205 gC m–2 y–1). Differences in CO 2‐exchange rates coincided with differences in the Bowen ratio, with logging areas partitioning most incoming radiation into sensible heat whereas bogs partitioned most into evaporation (latent heat). Effects of these different surface energy exchanges on local climate (convective storms and fires) and comparisons with the Canadian BOREAS experiment are discussed. Following a classification of disturbances and their effects on ecosystem carbon balances, fire and logging are discussed as the main processes causing carbon losses that bypass heterotrophic respiration in Siberia. Following two approaches, NBP was estimated to be only about 13–16 mmol m–2 y–1 for Siberia. It may reach 67 mmol m–2 y–1 in North America, and about 140–400 mmol m–2 y–1 in Scandinavia. We conclude that fire speeds up the carbon cycle, but that it results also in long‐term carbon sequestration by charcoal formation. For at least 14 years after logging, regrowth forests remain net sources of CO 2 to the atmosphere. This has important implications regarding the effects of Siberian forest management on atmospheric concentrations. For many years after logging has taken place, regrowth forests remain weaker sinks for atmospheric CO 2 than are nearby old‐growth forests.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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
Observational Contrains on the Global Atmospheric Co 2 Budget
Tans, P. P., Fung, I. Y., & Takahashi, T. (1990) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.247.4949.1431 · Cited by 2,066
Cited by
How strongly can forest management influence soil carbon sequestration?
Jandl, R., Lindner, M., Vesterdal, L., Bauwens, B., Baritz, R., Hagedorn, F., Johnson, D. W., Minkkinen, K., & Byrne, K. A. (2007) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2006.09.003 · Cited by 1,458
Baldocchi, D. (2008) · Australian Journal of Botany · doi:10.1071/bt07151 · Cited by 1,123
Carbon cycling and storage in world forests: biome patterns related to forest age
Pregitzer, K. S., & Euskirchen, E. S. (2004) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00866.x · Cited by 1,041
CO 2 balance of boreal, temperate, and tropical forests derived from a global database
LUYSSAERT, S., INGLIMA, I., JUNG, M., RICHARDSON, A. D., REICHSTEIN, M., PAPALE, D., PIAO, S. L., SCHULZE, E. ‐., WINGATE, L., MATTEUCCI, G., et al. (2007) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01439.x · Cited by 1,010
Self-citationSensitivity of the carbon cycle in the Arctic to climate change
McGuire, A. D., Anderson, L. G., Christensen, T. R., Dallimore, S., Guo, L., Hayes, D. J., Heimann, M., Lorenson, T. D., Macdonald, R. W., & Roulet, N. (2009) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.1890/08-2025.1 · Cited by 984
Metadata
- Authors
- Schulze, E. ‐., Lloyd, J., Kelliher, F. M., Wirth, C., Rebmann, C., Lühker, B., Mund, M., Knohl, A., Milyukova, I. M., Schulze, W., Ziegler, W., Varlagin, A. Β., Sogachev, A. F., Valentini, R., Dore, S., Grigoriev, S., Kolle, O., Panfyorov, M. I., Tchebakova, N., & Vygodskaya, N.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1999-08
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 703-722
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W2123265359
- Cited by
- 380
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 27.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Productivity of forests in the Eurosiberian boreal region and their potential to act as a carbon sink –‐ a synthesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1999.00266.x
- The paper
- Schulze, E. ‐., Lloyd, J., Kelliher, F. M., Wirth, C., Rebmann, C., Lühker, B., Mund, M., Knohl, A., Milyukova, I. M., Schulze, W., Ziegler, W., Varlagin, A. Β., Sogachev, A. F., Valentini, R., Dore, S., Grigoriev, S., Kolle, O., Panfyorov, M. I., Tchebakova, N., & Vygodskaya, N. (1999). Productivity of forests in the Eurosiberian boreal region and their potential to act as a carbon sink –‐ a synthesis. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1999.00266.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.