Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 498

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Increasing biomass in Amazonian forest plots

Open access
Baker, Timothy R., Phillips, Oliver L., Malhi, Yadvinder, Almeida, Samuel, Arroyo, Luzmila, Di Fiore, Anthony, Erwin, Terry, Higuchi, Niro, Killeen, Timothy J., Laurance, Susan G., Laurance, William F., Lewis, Simon L., Monteagudo, Abel, Neill, David A., Núñez Vargas, Percy, Pitman, Nigel C. A., Silva, J. Natalino M., Vásquez Martínez, Rodolfo·2004·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

A previous study by Phillips et al . of changes in the biomass of permanent sample plots in Amazonian forests was used to infer the presence of a regional carbon sink. However, these results generated a vigorous debate about sampling and methodological issues. Therefore we present a new analysis of biomass change in old–growth Amazonian forest plots using updated inventory data. We find that across 59 sites, the above–ground dry biomass in trees that are more than 10 cm in diameter (AGB) has increased since plot establishment by 1.22 ± 0.43 Mg per hectare per year (ha −1 yr −1 ), where 1 ha = 10 4 m 2 ), or 0.98 ± 0.38 Mg ha −1 yr −1 if individual plot values are weighted by the number of hectare years of monitoring. This significant increase is neither confounded by spatial or temporal variation in wood specific gravity, nor dependent on the allometric equation used to estimate AGB. The conclusion is also robust to uncertainty about diameter measurements for problematic trees: for 34 plots in western Amazon forests a significant increase in AGB is found even with a conservative assumption of zero growth for all trees where diameter measurements were made using optical methods and/or growth rates needed to be estimated following fieldwork. Overall, our results suggest a slightly greater rate of net stand–level change than was reported by Phillips et al . Considering the spatial and temporal scale of sampling and associated studies showing increases in forest growth and stem turnover, the results presented here suggest that the total biomass of these plots has on average increased and that there has been a regional–scale carbon sink in old–growth Amazonian forests during the previous two decades.

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 · 10.1098/rstb.2003.1422

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.

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

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

Cited by

See all 498

Metadata

Authors
Baker, T. R., Phillips, O. L., Malhi, Y., Almeida, S., Arroyo, L., Di Fiore, A., Erwin, T., Higuchi, N., Killeen, T. J., Laurance, S. G., Laurance, W. F., Lewis, S. L., Monteagudo, A., Neill, D. A., Núñez Vargas, P., Pitman, N. C. A., Silva, J. N. M., & Vásquez Martínez, R.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Published
2004-03-29
Volume
359
Issue
1443
Pages
353-365
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2135844612
Cited by
498
References
0
FWCI
26.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Increasing biomass in Amazonian forest plots. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.2003.1422
The paper
Baker, T. R., Phillips, O. L., Malhi, Y., Almeida, S., Arroyo, L., Di Fiore, A., Erwin, T., Higuchi, N., Killeen, T. J., Laurance, S. G., Laurance, W. F., Lewis, S. L., Monteagudo, A., Neill, D. A., Núñez Vargas, P., Pitman, N. C. A., Silva, J. N. M., & Vásquez Martínez, R. (2004). Increasing biomass in Amazonian forest plots. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2003.1422

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.