Cited by 26

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Holocene increases in palm abundances in north‐western Amazonia

Heijink, Britte M., McMichael, Crystal N. H., Piperno, Dolores R., Duivenvoorden, Joost F., Cárdenas, Dairon, Duque, Álvaro·2020·Journal of Biogeography

Abstract

Aim: In Amazonia, 227 of c. 16,000 tree species account for half the individual trees (termed ‘hyperdominant’ species), and a disproportionate number of these species are palms. Our objectives are to show how and whether palm abundance has changed through the Holocene. Here, we reconstruct a detailed fire and vegetation history from north‐western Amazonia, with a focus on changes in palm abundances, and compare our results with regional data. Location: Amacayacu, Colombia. Taxon: Amazonian palms. Methods: We performed charcoal and phytolith analysis on soil cores, and obtained ages of past fires using 14 C dating. We measured charcoal abundances and the relative abundances of phytoliths (silica‐based microfossils) for all samples. We used these data to reconstruct changes in fire and vegetation, and compared these data with the species composition of palms in the modern forest. Results: Seven 14 C dates from charcoal in three cores provided fire ages ranging from 1630 to 2450 calibrated years before present. Charcoal was absent from one‐third of the cores. Palm phytoliths from genera such as Iriartea, Socratea, and Astrocaryum have increased through time, while genera such as Euterpe, Hyospathe, and Oenocarpus have remained relatively stable and similar to modern levels. Overall, palm abundances were negatively correlated with charcoal measurements. Decorated sphere phytoliths, produced from unknown arboreal taxa were positively correlated with charcoal presence and abundance. Main conclusions: Palms have increased at Amacayacu and other forest plots through time, but the increases are largest in north‐western Amazonia. The presence of fire, however, dampens the increase in palms through time. When compared with reconstructions from other Amazon regions, our results suggest that increases in palm abundances in the late Holocene occurred both in the presence and absence of direct pre‐Columbian human influence, and that response was strongest in north‐western Amazonia when human influence was minimal.

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/jbi.13721

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

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?

  • Low abundances of phytoliths from grasses and herbs (< 4%) reflect closed canopy forested settings.

    “This and other Neotropical studies show that high abundances of arboreal phytoliths (> 60%) and low abundances of phytoliths from grasses and herbs (< 4%) reflect closed canopy forested settings (Dickau et al. 2013; Heijink et al. 2020; Watling et al. 2020; Piperno et al. 2021).”
  • Across the Neotropics, palms can comprise up to 60% of the phytolith assemblage of closed canopy forests.

    “Across the Neotropics, palms can comprise up to 60% of the phytolith assemblage of closed canopy forests (Dickau et al. 2013; Heijink et al. 2020; Crifò and Strömberg 2021).”
  • Our results confirm previous studies from high biomass regions of the northwestern Amazon where soil core samples contained a lack of grasses, herbs, and cultivars, and were interpreted as having little to no evidence of past forest opening.

    “Our results also confirm previous studies from high biomass regions of the northwestern Amazon (Fig. 6B) where soil core samples contained a lack of grasses, herbs, and cultivars, and were interpreted as having little to no evidence of past forest opening (McMichael et al. 2012a, b, 2015; Heijink et al. 2020; Piperno et al. 2021).”
  • High abundances of arboreal phytoliths (> 60%) reflect closed canopy forested settings.

    “This and other Neotropical studies show that high abundances of arboreal phytoliths (> 60%) and low abundances of phytoliths from grasses and herbs (< 4%) reflect closed canopy forested settings (Dickau et al. 2013; Heijink et al. 2020; Watling et al. 2020; Piperno et al. 2021).”

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 86

  1. Abramoff M. D., 2004, Image processing with ImageJ, Biophotonics International, 11, 36
  2. 10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.08.030 · DOI
  3. Almeida F. O., 2014, Antes de Orellana: Actas del 3rd Encuentro Internacional de Arqueologia Amazonica, 175
  4. 10.1111/gcb.12712 · DOI
  5. 10.1098/rstb.2007.0013 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2015.11.001 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2016.03.022 · DOI
  8. 10.1111/1365-2745.12600 · DOI
  9. 10.1111/jbi.12638 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1038/340303a0 · DOI
  11. 10.1098/rstb.2007.0014 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1046/j.1466-822X.2003.00020.x · DOI
  13. 10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[2662:EFATLS]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  14. 10.1098/rspb.2015.0813 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1007/BF00141276 · DOI
  16. 10.1186/1741-7007-11-48 · DOI
  17. 10.1007/s10531-016-1265-9 · DOI
  18. 10.3390/f10020128 · DOI
  19. 10.1038/ncomms7857 · DOI
  20. 10.5194/bg-9-3381-2012 · DOI
  21. 10.1073/pnas.85.1.156 · DOI
  22. 10.2307/2399464 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.gca.2010.11.029 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1007/978-3-662-05683-7 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1038/nature17176 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.09.045 · DOI
  27. 10.1126/science.165.3889.131 · DOI
  28. 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2006.00257.x · DOI
  29. Henderson A., 1997, Field guide to the palms of the Americas
  30. 10.1002/joc.1276 · DOI
  31. 10.2458/azu_js_rc.55.16783 · DOI
  32. 10.1016/0031-0182(94)90074-4 · DOI
  33. Hubbell S. P., 2001, The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography
  34. 10.3389/fevo.2018.00193 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 10.1111/j.1095-8339.2004.00345.x · DOI
  36. 10.1111/gcb.13315 · DOI
  37. 10.1007/s10531-010-9813-1 · DOI
  38. 10.1126/science.aal0157 · DOI · Paper page
  39. 10.3389/fevo.2017.00171 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Lombardo U., 2013, Human–environment interactions in pre‐Columbian Amazonia: The case of the Llanos de Moxos, Bolivia, 109
  41. 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2011.01312.x · DOI
  42. 10.1038/s41477-018-0205-y · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1126/science.1146961 · DOI
  44. 10.1017/qua.2018.152 · DOI
  45. 10.1016/j.palaeo.2012.05.004 · DOI
  46. 10.1073/pnas.1614577114 · DOI · Paper page
  47. 10.1126/science.1219982 · DOI · Paper page
  48. 10.3389/fevo.2015.00141 · DOI
  49. Medina J., 1934, The discovery of the Amazon according to the account of Friar Caspar de Carvajal and other documents
  50. 10.1111/boj.12438 · DOI
  51. Morcote‐Rios G., 2013, Terras Pretas de Índio of the Caquetá‐Japurá River (Colombian Amazonia), Tipití: Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South. America, 11, 30
  52. 10.1038/35002501 · DOI · Paper page
  53. Pärssinen M., 2003, Western Amazonia – Amazonia ocidental, 97
  54. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98485.x · DOI · Paper page
  55. 10.1073/pnas.1516525113 · DOI · Paper page
  56. Piperno D. R., 2006, Phytoliths: A comprehensive guide for archaeologists and paleoecologists
  57. 10.1086/659998 · DOI · Paper page
  58. 10.1006/qres.1996.0020 · DOI · Paper page
  59. 10.1177/0959683615588374 · DOI
  60. 10.1016/j.ancene.2019.100211 · DOI · Paper page
  61. R Development Core Team, 2013, R: A language and environment for statistical computing
  62. 10.1029/2007EO210003 · DOI · Paper page
  63. 10.1111/jbi.12518 · DOI
  64. 10.1126/science.272.5260.373 · DOI · Paper page
  65. Rudas Lleras A. N., 2005, Flórula del Parque Nacional Natural Amacayacu
  66. 10.1016/0033-5894(86)90095-5 · DOI
  67. 10.1126/science.227.4682.53 · DOI
  68. 10.1016/S0168-583X(00)00234-2 · DOI
  69. 10.1179/0093469012Z.00000000012 · DOI · Paper page
  70. 10.1073/pnas.1423147112 · DOI
  71. 10.1038/nature05134 · DOI
  72. 10.1126/science.1243092 · DOI · Paper page
  73. 10.1111/jbi.12540 · DOI
  74. 10.1126/science.1078037 · DOI
  75. 10.2307/1940299 · DOI
  76. 10.1016/j.epsl.2008.07.060 · DOI · Paper page
  77. 10.1073/pnas.1614359114 · DOI
  78. 10.1371/journal.pone.0199868 · DOI
  79. 10.1191/0959683605hl795rr · DOI
  80. 10.1016/j.tree.2005.07.009 · DOI
  81. 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2001.tb00217.x · DOI
  82. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98333.x · DOI
  83. 10.1007/s00442-004-1554-y · DOI
  84. 10.1126/science.1192666 · DOI
  85. 10.1002/ecy.1950 · DOI
  86. Zuleta D., 2018, Importance of topography for tree species habitat distributions in a terra firme forest in the Colombian Amazon, Plant and Soil, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Heijink, B. M., McMichael, C. N. H., Piperno, D. R., Duivenvoorden, J. F., Cárdenas, D., & Duque, Á.
Venue
Journal of Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-10-11
Volume
47
Issue
3
Pages
698-711
ISSN
  • 0305-0270
  • 1365-2699
Cited by
26
References
0
Language
en
Funders
Center for Tropical Forest Science-ForestGEO (341243)

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