ArticlePloS one2025
Mapping spatiotemporal distribution of forest carbon density in Xizang, China.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Climate warming is a major global challenge, and forests, essential carbon sinks, are critical in mitigating its effects. Forest carbon density is a key parameter in assessing the carbon sinks. Traditional estimating methods of forest carbon density are time-consuming, labor-intensive, and difficult to apply on a large scale. Combining multispectral data with machine learning offers a promising solution, but accurately estimating forest carbon density remains challenging due to the band limitations of multi-spectral data. This study proposes a novel approach to address this limitation gap. We utilized Landsat 8 data and 919 samples from Xizang, China, simultaneously constructed geographic (GEO) and environmental factors (GEF) for estimating forest carbon density for the first time, and adopted three models to evaluate the effectiveness. The results indicate that the extreme gradient boosting (XGB) model is significantly better, the average R2 exceeds 0.77, especially in Rikaze exceeds 0.96. The total relative importance of GEF in the modelling exceeded 60%, Geo was the most critical variable, followed by CI. This study successfully used multi-spectral data to quantify the spatiotemporal distribution of forest carbon density and demonstrated that GEO and GEF are indispensable, which is expected to provide new perspectives and technical support for global carbon sink monitoring.
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.