Rapid tree carbon stock recovery in managed Amazonian forests

While around 20% of the Amazonian forest has been cleared for pastures and agriculture, one fourth of the remaining forest is dedicated to wood production. Most of these production forests have been or will be selectively harvested for commercial timber, but recent studies show that even soon after...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Current biology Vol. 25; no. 18; p. R787
Main Authors: Rutishauser, Ervan, Hérault, Bruno, Baraloto, Christopher, Blanc, Lilian, Descroix, Laurent, Sotta, Eleneide Doff, Ferreira, Joice, Kanashiro, Milton, Mazzei, Lucas, d'Oliveira, Marcus V N, de Oliveira, Luis C, Peña-Claros, Marielos, Putz, Francis E, Ruschel, Ademir R, Rodney, Ken, Roopsind, Anand, Shenkin, Alexander, da Silva, Katia E, de Souza, Cintia R, Toledo, Marisol, Vidal, Edson, West, Thales A P, Wortel, Verginia, Sist, Plinio
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: England 21.09.2015
Subjects:
ISSN:1879-0445, 1879-0445
Online Access:Get more information
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:While around 20% of the Amazonian forest has been cleared for pastures and agriculture, one fourth of the remaining forest is dedicated to wood production. Most of these production forests have been or will be selectively harvested for commercial timber, but recent studies show that even soon after logging, harvested stands retain much of their tree-biomass carbon and biodiversity. Comparing species richness of various animal taxa among logged and unlogged forests across the tropics, Burivalova et al. found that despite some variability among taxa, biodiversity loss was generally explained by logging intensity (the number of trees extracted). Here, we use a network of 79 permanent sample plots (376 ha total) located at 10 sites across the Amazon Basin to assess the main drivers of time-to-recovery of post-logging tree carbon (Table S1). Recovery time is of direct relevance to policies governing management practices (i.e., allowable volumes cut and cutting cycle lengths), and indirectly to forest-based climate change mitigation interventions.
Bibliography:content type line 23
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Correspondence-1
ISSN:1879-0445
1879-0445
DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2015.07.034