Dataset Information

Integrated global assessment of the natural forest carbon potential.

ABSTRACT: Forests are a substantial terrestrial carbon sink, but anthropogenic changes in land use and climate have considerably reduced the scale of this system¹. Remote-sensing estimates to quantify carbon losses from global forests^2-5 are characterized by considerable uncertainty and we lack a comprehensive ground-sourced evaluation to benchmark these estimates. Here we combine several ground-sourced⁶ and satellite-derived approaches^2,7,8 to evaluate the scale of the global forest carbon potential outside agricultural and urban lands. Despite regional variation, the predictions demonstrated remarkable consistency at a global scale, with only a 12% difference between the ground-sourced and satellite-derived estimates. At present, global forest carbon storage is markedly under the natural potential, with a total deficit of 226 Gt (model range = 151-363 Gt) in areas with low human footprint. Most (61%, 139 Gt C) of this potential is in areas with existing forests, in which ecosystem protection can allow forests to recover to maturity. The remaining 39% (87 Gt C) of potential lies in regions in which forests have been removed or fragmented. Although forests cannot be a substitute for emissions reductions, our results support the idea^2,3,9 that the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of diverse forests offer valuable contributions to meeting global climate and biodiversity targets.

SUBMITTER: Mo L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10700142 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Integrated global assessment of the natural forest carbon potential.

Mo Lidong L Zohner Constantin M CM Reich Peter B PB Liang Jingjing J de Miguel Sergio S Nabuurs Gert-Jan GJ Renner Susanne S SS van den Hoogen Johan J Araza Arnan A Herold Martin M Mirzagholi Leila L Ma Haozhi H Averill Colin C Phillips Oliver L OL Gamarra Javier G P JGP Hordijk Iris I Routh Devin D Abegg Meinrad M Adou Yao Yves C YC Alberti Giorgio G Almeyda Zambrano Angelica M AM Alvarado Braulio Vilchez BV Alvarez-Dávila Esteban E Alvarez-Loayza Patricia P Alves Luciana F LF Amaral Iêda I Ammer Christian C Antón-Fernández Clara C Araujo-Murakami Alejandro A Arroyo Luzmila L Avitabile Valerio V Aymard Gerardo A GA Baker Timothy R TR Bałazy Radomir R Banki Olaf O Barroso Jorcely G JG Bastian Meredith L ML Bastin Jean-Francois JF Birigazzi Luca L Birnbaum Philippe P Bitariho Robert R Boeckx Pascal P Bongers Frans F Bouriaud Olivier O Brancalion Pedro H S PHS Brandl Susanne S Brearley Francis Q FQ Brienen Roel R Broadbent Eben N EN Bruelheide Helge H Bussotti Filippo F Cazzolla Gatti Roberto R César Ricardo G RG Cesljar Goran G Chazdon Robin L RL Chen Han Y H HYH Chisholm Chelsea C Cho Hyunkook H Cienciala Emil E Clark Connie C Clark David D Colletta Gabriel D GD Coomes David A DA Cornejo Valverde Fernando F Corral-Rivas José J JJ Crim Philip M PM Cumming Jonathan R JR Dayanandan Selvadurai S de Gasper André L AL Decuyper Mathieu M Derroire Géraldine G DeVries Ben B Djordjevic Ilija I Dolezal Jiri J Dourdain Aurélie A Engone Obiang Nestor Laurier NL Enquist Brian J BJ Eyre Teresa J TJ Fandohan Adandé Belarmain AB Fayle Tom M TM Feldpausch Ted R TR Ferreira Leandro V LV Finér Leena L Fischer Markus M Fletcher Christine C Frizzera Lorenzo L Gianelle Damiano D Glick Henry B HB Harris David J DJ Hector Andrew A Hemp Andreas A Hengeveld Geerten G Hérault Bruno B Herbohn John L JL Hillers Annika A Honorio Coronado Eurídice N EN Hui Cang C Ibanez Thomas T Imai Nobuo N Jagodziński Andrzej M AM Jaroszewicz Bogdan B Johannsen Vivian Kvist VK Joly Carlos A CA Jucker Tommaso T Jung Ilbin I Karminov Viktor V Kartawinata Kuswata K Kearsley Elizabeth E Kenfack David D Kennard Deborah K DK Kepfer-Rojas Sebastian S Keppel Gunnar G Khan Mohammed Latif ML Killeen Timothy J TJ Kim Hyun Seok HS Kitayama Kanehiro K Köhl Michael M Korjus Henn H Kraxner Florian F Kucher Dmitry D Laarmann Diana D Lang Mait M Lu Huicui H Lukina Natalia V NV Maitner Brian S BS Malhi Yadvinder Y Marcon Eric E Marimon Beatriz Schwantes BS Marimon-Junior Ben Hur BH Marshall Andrew R AR Martin Emanuel H EH Meave Jorge A JA Melo-Cruz Omar O Mendoza Casimiro C Mendoza-Polo Irina I Miscicki Stanislaw S Merow Cory C Monteagudo Mendoza Abel A Moreno Vanessa S VS Mukul Sharif A SA Mundhenk Philip P Nava-Miranda María Guadalupe MG Neill David D Neldner Victor J VJ Nevenic Radovan V RV Ngugi Michael R MR Niklaus Pascal A PA Oleksyn Jacek J Ontikov Petr P Ortiz-Malavasi Edgar E Pan Yude Y Paquette Alain A Parada-Gutierrez Alexander A Parfenova Elena I EI Park Minjee M Parren Marc M Parthasarathy Narayanaswamy N Peri Pablo L PL Pfautsch Sebastian S Picard Nicolas N Piedade Maria Teresa F MTF Piotto Daniel D Pitman Nigel C A NCA Poulsen Axel Dalberg AD Poulsen John R JR Pretzsch Hans H Ramirez Arevalo Freddy F Restrepo-Correa Zorayda Z Rodeghiero Mirco M Rolim Samir G SG Roopsind Anand A Rovero Francesco F Rutishauser Ervan E Saikia Purabi P Salas-Eljatib Christian C Saner Philippe P Schall Peter P Schelhaas Mart-Jan MJ Schepaschenko Dmitry D Scherer-Lorenzen Michael M Schmid Bernhard B Schöngart Jochen J Searle Eric B EB Seben Vladimír V Serra-Diaz Josep M JM Sheil Douglas D Shvidenko Anatoly Z AZ Silva-Espejo Javier E JE Silveira Marcos M Singh James J Sist Plinio P Slik Ferry F Sonké Bonaventure B Souza Alexandre F AF Stereńczak Krzysztof J KJ Svenning Jens-Christian JC Svoboda Miroslav M Swanepoel Ben B Targhetta Natalia N Tchebakova Nadja N Ter Steege Hans H Thomas Raquel R Tikhonova Elena E Umunay Peter M PM Usoltsev Vladimir A VA Valencia Renato R Valladares Fernando F van der Plas Fons F Van Do Tran T van Nuland Michael E ME Vasquez Rodolfo M RM Verbeeck Hans H Viana Helder H Vibrans Alexander C AC Vieira Simone S von Gadow Klaus K Wang Hua-Feng HF Watson James V JV Werner Gijsbert D A GDA Wiser Susan K SK Wittmann Florian F Woell Hannsjoerg H Wortel Verginia V Zagt Roderik R Zawiła-Niedźwiecki Tomasz T Zhang Chunyu C Zhao Xiuhai X Zhou Mo M Zhu Zhi-Xin ZX Zo-Bi Irie C IC Gann George D GD Crowther Thomas W TW

Nature 20231113 7990

Forests are a substantial terrestrial carbon sink, but anthropogenic changes in land use and climate have considerably reduced the scale of this system1. Remote-sensing estimates to quantify carbon losses from global forests2-5 are characterized by considerable uncertainty and we lack a comprehensive ground-sourced evaluation to benchmark these estimates. Here we combine several ground-sourced6 and satellite-derived approaches2,7,8 to evaluate the scal ...[more]

PMID: 37957399

Similar Datasets

Project description:Potential natural vegetation (PNV) is the vegetation cover in equilibrium with climate, that would exist at a given location if not impacted by human activities. PNV is useful for raising public awareness about land degradation and for estimating land potential. This paper presents results of assessing machine learning algorithms-neural networks (nnet package), random forest (ranger), gradient boosting (gbm), K-nearest neighborhood (class) and Cubist-for operational mapping of PNV. Three case studies were considered: (1) global distribution of biomes based on the BIOME 6000 data set (8,057 modern pollen-based site reconstructions), (2) distribution of forest tree taxa in Europe based on detailed occurrence records (1,546,435 ground observations), and (3) global monthly fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (FAPAR) values (30,301 randomly-sampled points). A stack of 160 global maps representing biophysical conditions over land, including atmospheric, climatic, relief, and lithologic variables, were used as explanatory variables. The overall results indicate that random forest gives the overall best performance. The highest accuracy for predicting BIOME 6000 classes (20) was estimated to be between 33% (with spatial cross-validation) and 68% (simple random sub-setting), with the most important predictors being total annual precipitation, monthly temperatures, and bioclimatic layers. Predicting forest tree species (73) resulted in mapping accuracy of 25%, with the most important predictors being monthly cloud fraction, mean annual and monthly temperatures, and elevation. Regression models for FAPAR (monthly images) gave an R-square of 90% with the most important predictors being total annual precipitation, monthly cloud fraction, CHELSA bioclimatic layers, and month of the year, respectively. Further developments of PNV mapping could include using all GBIF records to map the global distribution of plant species at different taxonomic levels. This methodology could also be extended to dynamic modeling of PNV, so that future climate scenarios can be incorporated. Global maps of biomes, FAPAR and tree species at one km spatial resolution are available for download via http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/QQHCIK.

Project description:BackgroundForest landscape restoration (FLR) has been adopted by governments and practitioners across the globe to mitigate and adapt to climate change and restore ecological functions across degraded landscapes. However, the extent to which these activities capture CO2 with associated climate mitigation impacts are poorly known, especially in geographies where data on biomass growth of restored forests are limited or do not exist. To fill this gap, we developed biomass accumulation rates for a set of FLR activities (natural regeneration, planted forests and woodlots, agroforestry, and mangrove restoration) across the globe and global CO2 removal rates with corresponding confidence intervals, grouped by FLR activity and region/climate.ResultsPlanted forests and woodlots were found to have the highest CO2 removal rates, ranging from 4.5 to 40.7 t CO2 ha-1 year-1 during the first 20 years of growth. Mangrove tree restoration was the second most efficient FLR at removing CO2, with growth rates up to 23.1 t CO2 ha-1 year-1 the first 20 years post restoration. Natural regeneration removal rates were 9.1-18.8 t CO2 ha-1 year-1 during the first 20 years of forest regeneration, followed by agroforestry, the FLR category with the lowest and regionally broad removal rates (10.8-15.6 t CO2 ha-1 year-1). Biomass growth data was most abundant and widely distributed across the world for planted forests and natural regeneration, representing 45% and 32% of all the data points assessed, respectively. Agroforestry studies, were only found in Africa, Asia, and the Latin America and Caribbean regions.ConclusionThis study represents the most comprehensive review of published literature on tree growth and CO2 removals to date, which we operationalized by constructing removal rates for specific FLR activities across the globe. These rates can easily be applied by practitioners and decision-makers seeking to better understand the positive climate mitigation impacts of existing or planned FLR actions, or by countries making restoration pledges under the Bonn Challenge Commitments or fulfilling Nationally Determined Contributions to the UNFCCC, thereby helping boost FLR efforts world-wide.

Dataset Information

Integrated global assessment of the natural forest carbon potential.

Publications

Integrated global assessment of the natural forest carbon potential.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets