Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 216

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Implications of accounting for land use in simulations of ecosystem carbon cycling in Africa

Open access
Lindeskog, M., Arneth, A., Bondeau, A., Waha, K., Seaquist, J., Olin, S., Smith, B.·2013·Earth System Dynamics

Abstract

Abstract. Dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) are important tools for modelling impacts of global change on ecosystem services. However, most models do not take full account of human land management and land use and land cover changes (LULCCs). We integrated croplands and pasture and their management and natural vegetation recovery and succession following cropland abandonment into the LPJ-GUESS DGVM. The revised model was applied to Africa as a case study to investigate the implications of accounting for land use on net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) and the skill of the model in describing agricultural production and reproducing trends and patterns in vegetation structure and function. The seasonality of modelled monthly fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (FPAR) was shown to agree well with satellite-inferred normalised difference vegetation index (NDVI). In regions with a large proportion of cropland, the managed land addition improved the FPAR vs. NDVI fit significantly. Modelled 1991–1995 average yields for the seven most important African crops, representing potential optimal yields limited only by climate forcings, were generally higher than reported FAO yields by a factor of 2–6, similar to previous yield gap estimates. Modelled inter-annual yield variations during 1971–2005 generally agreed well with FAO statistics, especially in regions with pronounced climate seasonality. Modelled land–atmosphere carbon fluxes for Africa associated with land use change (0.07 PgC yr−1 release to the atmosphere for the 1980s) agreed well with previous estimates. Cropland management options (residue removal, grass as cover crop) were shown to be important to the land–atmosphere carbon flux for the 20th century.

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 · 10.5194/esd-4-385-2013

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 216

Metadata

Authors
Lindeskog, M., Arneth, A., Bondeau, A., Waha, K., Seaquist, J., Olin, S., & Smith, B.
Venue
Earth System Dynamics
Published
2013-11-01
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
385-407
ISSN
  • 2190-4979 (ISSN-L)
  • 2190-4987
OpenAlex
W2003888205
Cited by
216
References
4
FWCI
8.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Implications of accounting for land use in simulations of ecosystem carbon cycling in Africa. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/esd-4-385-2013
The paper
Lindeskog, M., Arneth, A., Bondeau, A., Waha, K., Seaquist, J., Olin, S., & Smith, B. (2013). Implications of accounting for land use in simulations of ecosystem carbon cycling in Africa. Earth System Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-385-2013

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.