ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2021
Natural disturbance impacts on trade-offs and co-benefits of forest biodiversity and carbon.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Demographic and Structural Variability Modulate Growth Dynamics in European Beech Primary Forests.Global change biology · 2026Article
- Structural characteristics mediate forest mitigation potential against climate change and biodiversity loss.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026Article
- Disturbance event impact on aboveground carbon storage and vulnerability of large trees in old-growth coniferous forest stands in Latvia.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Effect of forest management choices on carbon sequestration and biodiversity at national scale.Ambio · 2023Article
- Global patterns of vascular plant alpha diversity.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Natural disturbance impacts on trade-offs and co-benefits of forest biodiversity and carbon.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
35 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With accelerating environmental change, understanding forest disturbance impacts on trade-offs between biodiversity and carbon dynamics is of high socio-economic importance. Most studies, however, have assessed immediate or short-term effects of disturbance, while long-term impacts remain poorly understood. Using a tree-ring-based approach, we analysed the effect of 250 years of disturbances on present-day biodiversity indicators and carbon dynamics in primary forests. Disturbance legacies spanning centuries shaped contemporary forest co-benefits and trade-offs, with contrasting, local-scale effects. Disturbances enhanced carbon sequestration, reaching maximum rates within a comparatively narrow post-disturbance window (up to 50 years). Concurrently, disturbance diminished aboveground carbon storage, which gradually returned to peak levels over centuries. Temporal patterns in biodiversity potential were bimodal; the first maximum coincided with the short-term post-disturbance carbon sequestration peak, and the second occurred during periods of maximum carbon storage in complex old-growth forest. Despite fluctuating local-scale trade-offs, forest biodiversity and carbon storage remained stable across the broader study region, and our data support a positive relationship between carbon stocks and biodiversity potential. These findings underscore the interdependencies of forest processes, and highlight the necessity of large-scale conservation programmes to effectively promote both biodiversity and long-term carbon storage, particularly given the accelerating global biodiversity and climate crises.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.