ArticleCarbon balance and management2023
Effects of forest degradation classification on the uncertainty of aboveground carbon estimates in the Amazon.
Article in Carbon balance and management, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Carbon storage in mountain cloud forest communities, Jalpan de Serra, Querétaro, México.Carbon balance and management · 2025Article
- A large net carbon loss attributed to anthropogenic and natural disturbances in the Amazon Arc of Deforestation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTropical forests are critical for the global carbon budget, yet they have been threatened by deforestation and forest degradation by fire, selective logging, and fragmentation. Existing uncertainties on land cover classification and in biomass estimates hinder accurate attribution of carbon emissions to specific forest classes. In this study, we used textural metrics derived from PlanetScope images to implement a probabilistic classification framework to identify intact, logged and burned forests in three Amazonian sites. We also estimated biomass for these forest classes using airborne lidar and compared biomass uncertainties using the lidar-derived estimates only to biomass uncertainties considering the forest degradation classification as well.
resultsOur classification approach reached overall accuracy of 0.86, with accuracy at individual sites varying from 0.69 to 0.93. Logged forests showed variable biomass changes, while burned forests showed an average carbon loss of 35%. We found that including uncertainty in forest degradation classification significantly increased uncertainty and decreased estimates of mean carbon density in two of the three test sites.
conclusionsOur findings indicate that the attribution of biomass changes to forest degradation classes needs to account for the uncertainty in forest degradation classification. By combining very high-resolution images with lidar data, we could attribute carbon stock changes to specific pathways of forest degradation. This approach also allows quantifying uncertainties of carbon emissions associated with forest degradation through logging and fire. Both the attribution and uncertainty quantification provide critical information for national greenhouse gas inventories.
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.