Spatial heterogeneity of biomass and forest structure of the Amazon rain forest: Linking remote sensing, forest modelling and field inventory

Aim Estimating the current spatial variation of biomass in the Amazon rain forest is a challenge and remains a source of substantial uncertainty in the assessment of the global carbon cycle. Precise estimates need to consider small-scale variations of forest structures resulting from local disturbances, on the one hand, and require large-scale information on the state of the forest that can be detected by remote sensing, on the other hand. In this study, we introduce a novel method that links a forest gap model and a canopy height map to derive the biomass distribution of the Amazon rain forest. Location Amazon rain forest. Methods An individual-based forest model was applied to estimate the variation of aboveground biomass across the Amazon rain forest. The forest model simulated individual trees; hence, it allowed the direct comparison of simulated and observed canopy heights from remote sensing. The comparison enabled the detection of disturbed forest states and the derivation of a simulation-based biomass map at 0.16 ha resolution. Results Simulated biomass values ranged from 20 to 490 t (dry mass)/ha across 7.8 Mio km2 of Amazon rain forest. We estimated a total aboveground biomass stock of 76 GtC, with a coefficient of variation of 45%. We found mean differences of only 15% when comparing biomass values of the map with 114 field inventories. The forest model enables the derivation of additional estimates, such as basal area and stem density. Main conclusions Linking a canopy height map with an individual-based forest model captures the spatial variation of biomass in the Amazon rain forest at high resolution. The study demonstrates how this linkage allows for quantifying the spatial variation in forest structure caused by tree-level to regional-scale disturbances. It thus provides a basis for large-scale analyses on the heterogeneous structure of tropical forests and their carbon cycle.

[1]  J. R. Wallis,et al.  Some ecological consequences of a computer model of forest growth , 1972 .

[2]  H. Shugart.  A Theory of Forest Dynamics , 1984 .

[3]  Murugesu Sivapalan,et al.  Scale issues in hydrological modelling: A review , 1995 .

[4]  Wolfgang-Albert Flügel,et al.  Delineating hydrological response units by geographical information system analyses for regional hydrological modelling using PRMS/MMS in the drainage basin of the River Bröl, Germany , 1995 .

[5]  Andreas Huth,et al.  The effects of tree species grouping in tropical rainforest modelling: Simulations with the individual-based model Formind , 1998 .

[6]  H. Bugmann.  A Review of Forest Gap Models , 2001 .

[7]  Guoqing Sun,et al.  Northern Forest Ecosystem Dynamics Using Coupled Models and Remote Sensing , 2001 .

[8]  C. Tucker,et al.  A large carbon sink in the woody biomass of Northern forests , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  The spatial distribution of forest biomass in the Brazilian Amazon: a comparison of estimates , 2001 .

[10]  O. Phillips,et al.  An international network to monitor the structure, composition and dynamics of Amazonian forests (RAINFOR) , 2002 .

[11]  I. C. Prentice,et al.  Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ dynamic global vegetation model , 2003 .

[12]  J. Bryan Blair,et al.  Beyond potential vegetation: Combining lidar data and a height-structured model for carbon studies , 2004 .

[13]  Andreas Huth,et al.  Simulating growth dynamics in a South-East Asian rainforest threatened by recruitment shortage and tree harvesting , 2004 .

[14]  Richard Condit,et al.  Error propagation and scaling for tropical forest biomass estimates. , 2004, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[15]  Andreas Huth,et al.  Multicriteria evaluation of simulated logging scenarios in a tropical rain forest. , 2004, Journal of environmental management.

[16]  Maosheng Zhao,et al.  A Continuous Satellite-Derived Measure of Global Terrestrial Primary Production , 2004 .

[17]  N. Higuchi,et al.  Variation in aboveground tree live biomass in a central Amazonian Forest: Effects of soil and topography , 2006 .

[18]  J. Terborgh,et al.  The regional variation of aboveground live biomass in old‐growth Amazonian forests , 2006 .

[19]  T. L. Toan,et al.  Mapping of flood dynamics and spatial distribution of vegetation in the Amazon floodplain using multitemporal SAR data , 2007 .

[20]  Philip M. Fearnside,et al.  Wood density in forests of Brazil's 'arc of deforestation': Implications for biomass and flux of carbon from land-use change in Amazonia , 2007 .

[21]  J. V. Soares,et al.  Distribution of aboveground live biomass in the Amazon basin , 2007 .

[22]  Benjamin Smith,et al.  Representation of vegetation dynamics in the modelling of terrestrial ecosystems: comparing two contrasting approaches within European climate space , 2008 .

[23]  Stephen Sitch,et al.  Towards quantifying uncertainty in predictions of Amazon ‘dieback’ , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[24]  Philip M. Fearnside,et al.  Tree height in Brazil's 'arc of deforestation' : Shorter trees in south and southwest Amazonia imply lower biomass , 2008 .

[25]  S. Attinger,et al.  Multiscale parameter regionalization of a grid‐based hydrologic model at the mesoscale , 2010 .

[26]  R. B. Jackson,et al.  CO 2 emissions from forest loss , 2009 .

[27]  G. Hurtt,et al.  Estimation of tropical forest height and biomass dynamics using lidar remote sensing at La Selva, Costa Rica , 2009 .

[28]  Eduardo S Brondízio,et al.  LBA-ECO LC-09 Vegetation Composition and Structure in the Brazilian Amazon: 1992-1995 , 2009 .

[29]  Eduardo S Brondízio,et al.  LBA-ECO LC-09 Soil Composition and Structure in the Brazilian Amazon: 1992-1995 , 2009 .

[30]  P. Ciais,et al.  Mortality as a key driver of the spatial distribution of aboveground biomass in Amazonian forest: results from a dynamic vegetation model , 2010 .

[31]  M. Hansen,et al.  Quantification of global gross forest cover loss , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[32]  Wolfgang Lucht,et al.  Estimating the risk of Amazonian forest dieback. , 2010, The New phytologist.

[33]  D. A. King,et al.  Height-diameter allometry of tropical forest trees , 2010 .

[34]  Daniel R. Marsh,et al.  Rocket‐borne in situ measurements of meteor smoke: Charging properties and implications for seasonal variation , 2010 .

[35]  A. Baccini,et al.  Mapping forest canopy height globally with spaceborne lidar , 2011 .

[36]  W. Salas,et al.  Benchmark map of forest carbon stocks in tropical regions across three continents , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[37]  R. Houghton,et al.  Characterizing 3D vegetation structure from space: Mission requirements , 2011 .

[38]  O. Phillips,et al.  ForestPlots.net: a web application and research tool to manage and analyse tropical forest plot data , 2011 .

[39]  J. Terborgh,et al.  Basin-wide variations in Amazon forest structure and function are mediated by both soils and climate , 2012 .

[40]  S. Goetz,et al.  Estimated carbon dioxide emissions from tropical deforestation improved by carbon-density maps , 2012 .

[41]  J. Terborgh,et al.  Tree height integrated into pantropical forest biomass estimates , 2012 .

[42]  D. Roberts,et al.  The steady-state mosaic of disturbance and succession across an old-growth Central Amazon forest landscape , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[43]  Y. Malhi,et al.  Improving simulated Amazon forest biomass and productivity by including spatial variation in biophysical parameters , 2013 .

[44]  O. Phillips,et al.  Residence times of woody biomass in tropical forests , 2013 .

[45]  David Kenfack,et al.  Local spatial structure of forest biomass and its consequences for remote sensing of carbon stocks , 2014 .

[46]  William R. Wieder,et al.  Regridded Harmonized World Soil Database v1.2 , 2014 .

[47]  Roberta E. Martin,et al.  Amazonian landscapes and the bias in field studies of forest structure and biomass , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[48]  G. Balsamo,et al.  The WFDEI meteorological forcing data set: WATCH Forcing Data methodology applied to ERA‐Interim reanalysis data , 2014 .

[49]  Markus Metz,et al.  Long-term carbon loss in fragmented Neotropical forests , 2014, Nature Communications.

[50]  J. Terborgh,et al.  Markedly divergent estimates of Amazon forest carbon density from ground plots and satellites , 2014, Global ecology and biogeography : a journal of macroecology.

[51]  P. Balvanera,et al.  Diversity enhances carbon storage in tropical forests , 2015 .

[52]  M. Keller,et al.  Seeing the forest beyond the trees , 2015 .

[53]  N. Higuchi,et al.  Higher tree transpiration due to road-associated edge effects in a tropical moist lowland forest , 2015 .

[54]  Yadvinder Malhi,et al.  The linkages between photosynthesis, productivity, growth and biomass in lowland Amazonian forests , 2015, Global change biology.

[55]  Thuy Le Toan,et al.  Computer and remote‐sensing infrastructure to enhance large‐scale testing of individual‐based forest models , 2015 .

[56]  Marwan Younis,et al.  Tandem-L: A Highly Innovative Bistatic SAR Mission for Global Observation of Dynamic Processes on the Earth's Surface , 2015, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine.

[57]  Andreas Huth,et al.  Fast calibration of a dynamic vegetation model with minimum observation data , 2015 .

[58]  Ke Zhang,et al.  Variation in stem mortality rates determines patterns of above‐ground biomass in Amazonian forests: implications for dynamic global vegetation models , 2016, Global change biology.

[59]  R. Spencer,et al.  Molecular Signatures of Biogeochemical Transformations in Dissolved Organic Matter from Ten World Rivers , 2016, Front. Earth Sci..

[60]  Andreas Huth,et al.  Lessons learned from applying a forest gap model to understand ecosystem and carbon dynamics of complex tropical forests , 2016 .

[61]  A. Rammig,et al.  Amazon Forest Ecosystem Responses to Elevated Atmospheric CO2 and Alterations in Nutrient Availability: Filling the Gaps with Model-Experiment Integration , 2016, Front. Earth Sci..

[62]  Atul K. Jain,et al.  Global Carbon Budget 2016 , 2016 .

[63]  Arief Wijaya,et al.  An integrated pan‐tropical biomass map using multiple reference datasets , 2016, Global change biology.

[64]  Susan G. Letcher,et al.  Biomass resilience of Neotropical secondary forests , 2016, Nature.