Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 660

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

MORTALITY OF LARGE TREES AND LIANAS FOLLOWING EXPERIMENTAL DROUGHT IN AN AMAZON FOREST

Nepstad, Daniel C., Tohver, Ingrid Marisa, Ray, David, Moutinho, Paulo, Cardinot, Georgina·2007·Ecology

Abstract

Severe drought episodes such as those associated with El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events influence large areas of tropical forest and may become more frequent in the future. One of the most important forest responses to severe drought is tree mortality, which alters forest structure, composition, carbon content, and flammability, and which varies widely. This study tests the hypothesis that tree mortality increases abruptly during drought episodes when plant-available soil water (PAW) declines below a critical minimum threshold. It also examines the effect of tree size, plant life form (palm, liana, tree) and potential canopy position (understory, midcanopy, overstory) on drought-induced plant mortality. A severe, four-year drought episode was simulated by excluding 60% of incoming throughfall during each wet season using plastic panels installed in the understory of a 1-ha forest treatment plot, while a 1-ha control plot received normal rainfall. After 3.2 years, the treatment resulted in a 38% increase in mortality rates across all stems >2 cm dbh. Mortality rates increased 4.5-fold among large trees (>30 cm dbh) and twofold among medium trees (10-30 cm dbh) in response to the treatment, whereas the smallest stems were less responsive. Recruitment rates did not compensate for the elevated mortality of larger-diameter stems in the treatment plot. Overall, lianas proved more susceptible to drought-induced mortality than trees or palms, and potential overstory tree species were more vulnerable than midcanopy and understory species. Large stems contributed to 90% of the pretreatment live aboveground biomass in both plots. Large-tree mortality resulting from the treatment generated 3.4 times more dead biomass than the control plot. The dramatic mortality response suggests significant, adverse impacts on the global carbon cycle if climatic changes follow current 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 · 10.1890/06-1046.1

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 660

Metadata

Authors
Nepstad, D. C., Tohver, I. M., Ray, D., Moutinho, P., & Cardinot, G.
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-09
Volume
88
Issue
9
Pages
2259-2269
ISSN
0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2146858501
Cited by
660
References
2
FWCI
20.39
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: MORTALITY OF LARGE TREES AND LIANAS FOLLOWING EXPERIMENTAL DROUGHT IN AN AMAZON FOREST. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/06-1046.1
The paper
Nepstad, D. C., Tohver, I. M., Ray, D., Moutinho, P., & Cardinot, G. (2007). MORTALITY OF LARGE TREES AND LIANAS FOLLOWING EXPERIMENTAL DROUGHT IN AN AMAZON FOREST. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1890/06-1046.1

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.