Technical Comments

Comment on “Tropical forests are a net carbon source based on aboveground measurements of gain and loss”

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science  11 Jan 2019:
Vol. 363, Issue 6423, eaar3629
DOI: 10.1126/science.aar3629

Figures

  • Fig. 1 Tropical America.

    Except for some large industrial-scale clearings, mapped carbon losses within the Amazon Basin are largely uncorrelated with Landsat-derived tree cover loss. Left: Tropical America tree cover loss from Hansen et al. (2). Right: Aboveground carbon (AGC) loss from Baccini et al. (1). Top row: Extent of study area of Baccini et al. for tropical America. Middle row: 2800 km × 1500 km subset centered on Mato Grosso state, Brazil. Bottom row: 530 km × 290 km subset of Amazonas state, Brazil.

  • Fig. 2 Tropical Africa.

    The pattern of smallholder forest clearing along rural roads in the Congo Basin (12), which includes carbon loss due to the expansion of agriculture into primary forest, is wholly absent. Left: Tropical Africa tree cover loss from Hansen et al. (2). Right: Aboveground carbon (AGC) loss from Baccini et al. (1). Top row: Extent of study area of Baccini et al. for tropical Africa. Middle row: 2800 km × 1500 km subset centered on the Congo Basin. Bottom row: 530 km × 290 km subset of Tshuapa province, Democratic Republic of Congo.

  • Fig. 3 Tropical Asia.

    The documented difference in logging within the primary forests of the Malaysia/Indonesia border (13) is wholly absent in the carbon loss map. Left: Tropical Asia tree cover loss from Hansen et al. (2) Right: Aboveground carbon (AGC) loss from Baccini et al. (1). Top row: Extent of study area of Baccini et al. for tropical Asia (east and west edges truncated). Middle row: 2800 km × 1500 km subset centered the islands of Sumatra and Borneo. Bottom row: 530 km × 290 km subset of central Borneo along the Malaysia/Indonesia border.

Tables

  • Table 1 Disaggregation of Baccini et al. aboveground loss by percent tree cover, tree cover loss, forest intactness, and colocated tree cover loss and gain.
    Baccini et al. (1) aboveground lossTropical AmericaTropical AfricaTropical Asia
    By percent tree cover category of Hansen et al. (2)≥60% tree cover86.1%40.9%74.1%
    30–59% tree cover7.9%24.4%15.0%
    10–29% tree cover3.4%30.4%6.8%
    0–9% tree cover2.6%4.2%4.1%
    Within Hansen et al. (2) mapped tree cover loss≥60% tree cover27.1%13.4%47.9%
    30–59% tree cover3.0%8.9%6.6%
    10–29% tree cover0.9%6.1%2.0%
    0–9% tree cover0.2%0.0%0.4%
    Outside of Hansen et al. (2) mapped tree cover loss68.7%71.5%43.2%
    Within an intersection of intact (9) and hinterland (10) forest maps25.3%7.9%2.5%
    Within hinterland forests (10)28.9%10.5%3.7%
    For colocated tree cover loss and tree cover gain from Hansen et al. (2)0.65%0.00%5.45%

Navigate This Article