ArticleEcology letters2026
Divergent Spatial and Temporal Sensitivities of Forest Biomass to Climate Challenge Space-For-Time Assumptions and Models.
Article in Ecology letters, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding and projecting forest carbon responses to climate change remains challenging. The widely used space-for-time substitution (SFTS) approach assumes that ecological responses along spatial climate gradients can substitute for temporal relationships, yet agreement among spatial, temporal, and mechanistic approaches remains largely unknown. Using global satellite-derived aboveground biomass (AGB) data, we quantified forest AGB sensitivities to spatial versus temporal climate variability, projected climate-driven AGB changes under future emission scenarios, and compared results with Earth system models (ESMs). Spatial climate gradients explain substantially more AGB variation than temporal anomalies, with strong divergence across regions and forest ages. ESMs better reproduce spatial sensitivities than temporal ones. Temporal extrapolation generally projects future AGB gains, whereas spatial extrapolation often indicates AGB declines. These contrasts demonstrate that spatial, temporal, and model-based approaches capture distinct facets of forest-climate coupling, and integrating them can better constrain uncertainty in carbon-climate feedbacks and improve future ecosystem projections.
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.