Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 228

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multiple mechanisms of Amazonian forest biomass losses in three dynamic global vegetation models under climate change

Galbraith, David, Levy, Peter E., Sitch, Stephen, Huntingford, Chris, Cox, Peter, Williams, Mathew, Meir, Patrick·2010·New Phytologist

Abstract

*The large-scale loss of Amazonian rainforest under some future climate scenarios has generally been considered to be driven by increased drying over Amazonia predicted by some general circulation models (GCMs). However, the importance of rainfall relative to other drivers has never been formally examined. *Here, we conducted factorial simulations to ascertain the contributions of four environmental drivers (precipitation, temperature, humidity and CO(2)) to simulated changes in Amazonian vegetation carbon (C(veg)), in three dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) forced with climate data based on HadCM3 for four SRES scenarios. *Increased temperature was found to be more important than precipitation reduction in causing losses of Amazonian C(veg) in two DGVMs (Hyland and TRIFFID), and as important as precipitation reduction in a third DGVM (LPJ). Increases in plant respiration, direct declines in photosynthesis and increases in vapour pressure deficit (VPD) all contributed to reduce C(veg) under high temperature, but the contribution of each mechanism varied greatly across models. Rising CO(2) mitigated much of the climate-driven biomass losses in the models. *Additional work is required to constrain model behaviour with experimental data under conditions of high temperature and drought. Current models may be overly sensitive to long-term elevated temperatures as they do not account for physiological acclimation.

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 · 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03350.x

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 9 references

Cited by

See all 228

Metadata

Authors
Galbraith, D., Levy, P. E., Sitch, S., Huntingford, C., Cox, P., Williams, M., & Meir, P.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-07-19
Volume
187
Issue
3
Pages
647-665
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2054934527
Cited by
228
References
9
FWCI
13.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Multiple mechanisms of Amazonian forest biomass losses in three dynamic global vegetation models under climate change. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03350.x
The paper
Galbraith, D., Levy, P. E., Sitch, S., Huntingford, C., Cox, P., Williams, M., & Meir, P. (2010). Multiple mechanisms of Amazonian forest biomass losses in three dynamic global vegetation models under climate change. New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03350.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.