Cited by 12Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsRemote Sensing in Agriculture

A Low-Cost and Robust Landsat-Based Approach to Study Forest Degradation and Carbon Emissions from Selective Logging in the Venezuelan Amazon

Open access
Pacheco-Angulo, Carlos, Plata-Rocha, Wenseslao, Serrano, Julio, Vilanova, Emilio, Monjardin-Armenta, Sergio, González, Alvaro, Camargo, Cristopher·2021·Remote Sensing

Abstract

Selective logging in the tropics is a major driver of forest degradation by altering forest structure and function, including significant losses of aboveground carbon. In this study, we used a 30-year Landsat time series (1985–2015) to analyze forest degradation and carbon emissions due to selective logging in a Forest Reserve of the Venezuelan Amazon. Our work was conducted in two phases: the first, by means of a direct method we detected the infrastructure related to logging at the sub-pixel level, and for the second, we used an indirect approach using buffer areas applied to the results of the selective logging mapping. Pre- and post-logging forest inventory data, combined with the mapping analysis were used to quantify the effects of logging on aboveground carbon emissions for three different sources: hauling, skidding and tree felling. With an overall precision of 0.943, we demonstrate the potential of this method to efficiently map selective logging and forest degradation with commission and omission errors of +7.6 ± 4.5 (Mean ± SD %) and −7.5% ± 9.1 respectively. Forest degradation due to logging directly affected close to 24,480 ha, or about ~1% of the total area of the Imataca Forest Reserve. On average, with a relatively low harvest intensity of 2.8 ± 1.2 trees ha−1 or 10.5 ± 4.6 m3 ha−1, selective logging was responsible for the emission of 61 ± 21.9 Mg C ha−1. Lack of reduced impact logging guidelines contributed to pervasive effects reflected in a mean reduction of ~35% of the aboveground carbon compared to unlogged stands. This research contributes to further improve our understanding of the relationships between selective logging and forest degradation in tropical managed forests and serves as input for the potential implementation of projects for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+).

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 · 10.3390/rs13081435

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Forest degradation directly impacted 24,480 ha of the Imataca forest reserve in Venezuela's Amazon.

    “The findings indicated that forest degradation directly impacted 24,480 ha of the Imataca forest reserve.”

    From Strategies to achieve a carbon neutral society: a review (2022) · cites this paper as Pacheco-Angulo et al. 2021

  • With a harvest intensity of 2.8 ± 1.2 trees ha−1, selective logging released around 61 ± 21.9 MgC ha−1.

    “With a harvest intensity of 2.8 ± 1.2 trees ha−1, selective logging released around 61 ± 21.9 MgC ha−1.”

    From Strategies to achieve a carbon neutral society: a review (2022) · cites this paper as Pacheco-Angulo 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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. FAO. Forest degradation and improvement. In Proceedings of the Second Expert Meeting on Harmonising Forest-Related Definitions for use by Various Stakeholders, Rome, Italy, 11-13 September 2002.
  2. Pacheco, C.; Aguado, I.; Mollicone, D. Las causas de la deforestación en Venezuela: Un estudio retrospectivo. Biollania 2011, 10, 281-292.
  3. Torres, A. La cuidada movilización de los recursos forestales. La industria forestal. Medio humano, establecimientos y actividades. In Geo Venezuela; Tomo 3; Fundación Polar: Caracas, Venezuela, 2008; pp. 382-438.
  4. Vidal, D.; Corrêa, M.; Gama, A.; Guerreiro, C.; De Almeida, A.; Corrêa, M.; Cavalcante, N.; Sant'Ana, J. Testes para definição dos parâmetros de detecção de nuvens e sombras em imagens do sensor AWIFS no plugin Cloud Detection, do aplicativo TerraAmazon. In Proceedings of the An. XVII Simpósio Bras. Sensoriamento Remoto-SBSR, João Pessoa, Brazil, 25-29 April 2015; INPE: Florianópolis, Brazil, 2015.
  5. Congalton, R.; Green, K. Assesing the Accuracy of Remotely Sensed Data: Principles and Practices; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2009.
  6. Pacheco, C.; Aguado, I.; Lopez, J. Comparación de los métodos utilizados en el monitoreo de la deforestación tropical, para la implementación de estrategias REDD+, caso de estudio los Llanos Occidentales Venezolanos. In Proceedings of the Anais XVI Simpósio Brasileiro Sensoriamento Remoto-SBSR, Foz do Iguaçu, Brasil, 13-18 April 2013; pp. 2817-2826.
  7. Brown, S.; Pearson, T.; Moore, N.; Parveen, A.; Ambagis, S.; Shoch, D. Impact of Selective Logging on the Carbon Stocks of Tropical Forests: Republic of Congo as a Case Study; Winrock International Report; USAID: Washington, DC, USA, 2005.
  8. Monteiro, A.; Lingnau, C.; Souza, C. Classificação orientada a objeto para detecção da exploração seletiva de madeira na amazônia.Object-based classification to detection of selective logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Rev. Bras. Cartogr. 2007, 59, 225-234.
  9. Ussher, E.; Gutiérrez, N.; Vilanova, E. Impacto del aprovechamiento forestal en la composición de especies de uso potencial maderable y no maderable en la reserva Forestal Imataca, Venezuela. In Proceedings of the XIV Congreso Forestal Mundial, Durban, Sudáfrica, 7-11 September 2015.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pacheco-Angulo, C., Plata-Rocha, W., Serrano, J., Vilanova, E., Monjardin-Armenta, S., González, A., & Camargo, C.
Affiliations
  • Facultad de Ciencias Forestales y Ambientales, Universidad de los Andes, Mérida 5110, Venezuela
  • Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa (MX)
  • Universidad de Los Andes (VE)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Facultad de Ciencias de la Tierra y el Espacio, Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, Sinaloa M-80029, Mexico
Venue
Remote Sensing
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-04-08
Volume
13
Issue
8
Pages
1435
ISSN
2072-4292 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3155157871
Cited by
12
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3
FWCI
0.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Remote Sensing (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Global Environment Facility
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Remote Sensing in Agriculture
Keywords
selective logging, forest degradation, Landsat time series, buffer zones, reduced impact logging, Venezuelan Amazon, REDD+, harvest intensity

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