Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42605729›Full record

ArticleGlobal change biology2026

Aboveground Biomass Accumulation Over Two Decades Across a Gradient of Tropical Forest Restoration Interventions.

Francis H Joyce, Rakan A Zahawi, Leland K Werden, Sebastian Zarges, Matheus Pinheiro Ferreira, Angélica M Almeyda Zambrano, Eben N Broadbent, Juan Abel Rosales, Karen D Holl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global change biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Francis H JoyceDepartment of Environmental Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6699-1842
Rakan A ZahawiCharles Darwin Research Station, Charles Darwin Foundation, Puerto Ayora, Galápagos, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0002-5678-2967
Leland K WerdenDepartment of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3579-4352
Sebastian ZargesForest Nature Conservation, Northwest German Forest Research Institute, Hann. Münden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3841-2388
Matheus Pinheiro FerreiraDepartment of Forest Sciences, "Luiz de Queiroz" College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo, Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-0687-4422
Angélica M Almeyda ZambranoSpatial Ecology and Conservation (SPEC) Lab, Center for Latin American Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5081-9936
Eben N BroadbentSpatial Ecology and Conservation (SPEC) Lab, School of Forest, Fisheries, and Geomatics Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4488-4237
Juan Abel RosalesLas Cruces Biological Station, Organization for Tropical Studies, San Vito de Coto Brus, Costa Rica.
Karen D HollDepartment of Environmental Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2893-6161

Funding

National Science Foundation DEB 0515577National Science Foundation DEB 09-18112National Science Foundation DEB 14-56520National Science Foundation DEB 20-16623
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tropical forest restoration is an important nature-based solution that can sequester carbon as a means to mitigate climate change. Restoration approaches range from natural regeneration to intensive tree planting, but few studies have compared aboveground biomass (AGB) stocks over decadal time scales across multiple restoration treatments implemented at the same sites. Here we leverage data from a two-decade restoration experiment in southern Costa Rica; in 2004-2006, we established restoration plots representing a gradient of intervention intensity: natural regeneration (no planting), applied nucleation (planting tree clusters), and plantation (full planting). We compare 18-20 years of AGB across treatments of the four planted tree species and naturally recruited trees. We also examine the relationships between AGB pools and structural metrics derived from UAV-borne LiDAR data collected after 16-18 years. Because most AGB was in planted trees, AGB was about 6.5 times greater in plantations compared to natural regeneration, and double in plantations compared to applied nucleation after two decades, despite substantial mortality of planted trees. However, the plantation treatment suppressed naturally recruited AGB and accumulated only half the amount of the natural regeneration treatment. Natural recruits comprised four times the proportion of AGB in applied nucleation compared to plantation. LiDAR-quantified LAI was more tightly correlated with total AGB in natural regeneration plots, whereas canopy height was more strongly correlated with planted biomass in plantation and applied nucleation. Our results highlight that tree planting accelerates AGB accumulation at degraded sites and illustrate that practitioners should select species with complementary life history strategies that enable carbon to be sequestered beyond the first decade. Given the tradeoff between planted tree biomass and naturally recruited biomass, spatially patterned methods that plant fewer trees may better balance restoration goals beyond carbon accumulation, leading to more structurally and biologically diverse reforested systems.

Indexed as

BiomassEnvironmental Restoration and RemediationForestsTreesCarbon SequestrationCosta RicaTropical Climateapplied nucleationcanopy heightcarbon sequestrationforest recoveryleaf area indexLiDARplantationreforestationsecondary foresttropical forest

Identifiers

PMID42605729
PMCPMC13479047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.