Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jul 13;9(1):2709.
doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-05132-5.

Limits to growth of forest biomass carbon sink under climate change

Affiliations

Limits to growth of forest biomass carbon sink under climate change

Kai Zhu et al. Nat Commun. .

Abstract

Widely recognized as a significant carbon sink, North American forests have experienced a history of recovery and are facing an uncertain future. This growing carbon sink is dictated by recovery from land-use change, with growth trajectory modified by environmental change. To address both processes, we compiled a forest inventory dataset from North America to quantify aboveground biomass growth with stand age across forest types and climate gradients. Here we show, the biomass grows from 90 Mg ha-1 (2000-2016) to 105 Mg ha-1 (2020 s), 128 Mg ha-1 (2050 s), and 146 Mg ha-1 (2080 s) under climate change scenarios with no further disturbances. Climate change modifies the forest recovery trajectory to some extent, but the overall growth is limited, showing signs of biomass saturation. The future (2080s) biomass will only sequester at most 22% more carbon than the current level. Given such a strong sink has limited growth potential, our ground-based analysis suggests policy changes to sustain the carbon sink.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Forest aboveground biomass current recovery with stand age across forest-type. Observed and modeled aboveground biomass and stand age in 23 primary forest types across North America are summarized for the current period, 2000–2016. Observed values (gray boxplots) are collected from the National Forest Inventory programs in the United States and Canada. Modeled values (red lines and ribbons) are calculated as the posterior means (lines) and 95% credible intervals (ribbons) from the hierarchical Bayesian growth model fitted to the current data. Each forest-type is fitted to the model separately
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Geographic distributions of current forest aboveground biomass. Both the observed and modeled maps are averaged at the 10-min longitude by latitude resolution from inventory plots for the current period, 2000–2016. GIS data source: GADM database of Global Administrative Areas (https://gadm.org)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Trends of the current and future forest aboveground biomass. The current period (2000–2016) is summarized as observed and modeled values. The future periods (2020s, 2050s, 2080s) are summarized as two IPCC scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) under the best-case circumstances of no disturbances. Points are means, error bars are standard deviations, thick lines are 50% quantiles (25% and 75%), and thin lines are 90% quantiles (5% and 95%)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Geographic distributions of future forest aboveground biomass and current vs. future ratio. The modeled aboveground biomass across North America during the future period, 2080s, under the RCP8.5 scenario, is used together with the current biomass (Fig. 2) to calculate the ratio of current vs. future biomass. The ratio summarizes the extent to which the current biomass approaches the future biomass potential under the best-case circumstances of no disturbances. Both maps are averaged at the 10-min longitude by latitude resolution from inventory plots. GIS data source: GADM database of Global Administrative Areas (https://gadm.org)

References

    1. Pan YD, et al. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science. 2011;333:988–993. doi: 10.1126/science.1201609. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Houghton RA. Why are estimates of the terrestrial carbon balance so different? Glob. Chang. Biol. 2003;9:500–509. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00620.x. - DOI
    1. Caspersen JP, et al. Contributions of land-use history to carbon accumulation in US forests. Science. 2000;290:1148–1151. doi: 10.1126/science.290.5494.1148. - DOI - PubMed
    1. McMahon SM, Parker GG, Miller DR. Evidence for a recent increase in forest growth. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2010;107:3611–3615. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0912376107. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dale VH, et al. Climate change and forest disturbances. Bioscience. 2001;51:723–734. doi: 10.1641/0006-3568(2001)051[0723:CCAFD]2.0.CO;2. - DOI

Publication types