Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39616164›Full record

ArticleNature communications2024

Future land carbon removals in China consistent with national inventory.

Yue He, Shilong Piao, Philippe Ciais, Hao Xu, Thomas Gasser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yue HeInstitute of Carbon Neutrality, Sino-French Institute for Earth System Science, College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7754-7026
Shilong PiaoInstitute of Carbon Neutrality, Sino-French Institute for Earth System Science, College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China. slpiao@pku.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8057-2292
Philippe CiaisLaboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement (LSCE), CEA CNRS UVSQ, 91191, Gif Sur Yvette, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8560-4943
Hao XuInstitute of Carbon Neutrality, Sino-French Institute for Earth System Science, College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Thomas GasserInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria. gasser@iiasa.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4882-2647

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

China's commitment to carbon neutrality by 2060 relies on the Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry (LULUCF) sector, with forestation targets designed to enhance carbon removal. However, the exact sequestration potential of these initiatives remains uncertain due to differing accounting conventions between national inventories and scientific assessments. Here, we reconcile both estimates and reassess LULUCF carbon fluxes up to 2100, using a spatially explicit bookkeeping model, state-of-the-art historical data, and national forestation targets. We simulate a carbon sink of -0.24 ± 0.03 Gt C yr

Identifiers

PMID39616164
PMCPMC11608317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.