Repository landing page

We are not able to resolve this OAI Identifier to the repository landing page. If you are the repository manager for this record, please head to the Dashboard and adjust the settings.

Abstract

Accurately monitoring tropical forest carbon stocks is an outstanding challenge. Allometric models that consider tree diameter, height and wood density as predictors are currently used in most tropical forest carbon studies. In particular, a pantropical biomass model has been widely used for approximately a decade, and its most recent version will certainly constitute a reference in the coming years. However, this reference model shows a systematic bias for the largest trees. Because large trees are key drivers of forest carbon stocks and dynamics, understanding the origin and the consequences of this bias is of utmost concern. In this study, we compiled a unique tree mass dataset on 673 trees measured in five tropical countries (101 trees > 100 cm in diameter) and an original dataset of 130 forest plots (1 ha) from central Africa to quantify the error of biomass allometric models at the individual and plot levels when explicitly accounting or not accounting for crown mass variations. We first showed that the proportion of crown to total tree aboveground biomass is highly variable among trees, ranging from 3 to 88 %. This proportion was constant on average for trees 1 Mg) and reduced the range of plot-level error from −23–16 to 0–10 %. The disproportionally higher allocation of large trees to crown mass may thus explain the bias observed recently in the reference pantropical model. This bias leads to far-from-negligible, but often overlooked, systematic errors at the plot level and may be easily corrected by accounting for a crown mass proxy for the largest trees in a stand, thus suggesting that the accuracy of forest carbon estimates can be significantly improved at a minimal cost

Similar works

Full text

thumbnail-image

Dryad Digital Repository (Duke University)

redirect
Last time updated on 30/10/2019

This paper was published in Dryad Digital Repository (Duke University).

Having an issue?

Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.