scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Nikée Groot

Bio: Nikée Groot is an academic researcher from University of Leeds. The author has contributed to research in topics: Ecosystem & Sink (geography). The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 4 publications receiving 1148 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Roel J. W. Brienen1, Oliver L. Phillips1, Ted R. Feldpausch1, Ted R. Feldpausch2, Emanuel Gloor1, Timothy R. Baker1, Jon Lloyd3, Jon Lloyd4, Gabriela Lopez-Gonzalez1, Abel Monteagudo-Mendoza, Yadvinder Malhi5, Simon L. Lewis6, Simon L. Lewis1, R. Vásquez Martínez, Miguel Alexiades7, E. Alvarez Dávila, Patricia Alvarez-Loayza8, Ana Andrade9, Luiz E. O. C. Aragão10, Luiz E. O. C. Aragão2, Alejandro Araujo-Murakami11, Eric Arets12, Luzmila Arroyo11, Olaf Bánki13, Christopher Baraloto14, Christopher Baraloto15, Jorcely Barroso16, Damien Bonal14, René G. A. Boot17, José Luís Camargo9, Carolina V. Castilho18, V. Chama, Kuo-Jung Chao1, Kuo-Jung Chao19, Jérôme Chave20, James A. Comiskey21, F. Cornejo Valverde22, L da Costa23, E. A. de Oliveira24, A. Di Fiore25, Terry L. Erwin26, Sophie Fauset1, Mônica Forsthofer24, David W. Galbraith1, E S Grahame1, Nikée Groot1, Bruno Hérault, Niro Higuchi9, E.N. Honorio Coronado1, E.N. Honorio Coronado22, Helen C. Keeling1, Timothy J. Killeen27, William F. Laurance4, Susan G. Laurance4, Juan Carlos Licona, W E Magnussen, Beatriz Schwantes Marimon24, Ben Hur Marimon-Junior24, Casimiro Mendoza28, David A. Neill, Euler Melo Nogueira, Pablo Núñez, N. C. Pallqui Camacho, Alexander Parada11, G. Pardo-Molina, Julie Peacock1, Marielos Peña-Claros12, Georgia Pickavance1, Nigel C. A. Pitman29, Nigel C. A. Pitman8, Lourens Poorter12, Adriana Prieto30, Carlos A. Quesada, Fredy Ramírez30, Hirma Ramírez-Angulo31, Zorayda Restrepo, Anand Roopsind, Agustín Rudas32, Rafael de Paiva Salomão33, Michael P. Schwarz1, Natalino Silva, Javier E. Silva-Espejo, Marcos Silveira16, Juliana Stropp, Joey Talbot1, H. ter Steege34, H. ter Steege35, J Teran-Aguilar, John Terborgh8, Raquel Thomas-Caesar, Marisol Toledo, Mireia Torello-Raventos4, Ricardo Keichi Umetsu24, G. M. F. van der Heijden36, G. M. F. van der Heijden37, G. M. F. van der Heijden38, P. van der Hout, I. C. Guimarães Vieira33, Simone Aparecida Vieira39, Emilio Vilanova31, Vincent A. Vos, Roderick Zagt17 
19 Mar 2015-Nature
TL;DR: It is confirmed that Amazon forests have acted as a long-term net biomass sink, but the observed decline of the Amazon sink diverges markedly from the recent increase in terrestrial carbon uptake at the global scale, and is contrary to expectations based on models
Abstract: Atmospheric carbon dioxide records indicate that the land surface has acted as a strong global carbon sink over recent decades, with a substantial fraction of this sink probably located in the tropics, particularly in the Amazon. Nevertheless, it is unclear how the terrestrial carbon sink will evolve as climate and atmospheric composition continue to change. Here we analyse the historical evolution of the biomass dynamics of the Amazon rainforest over three decades using a distributed network of 321 plots. While this analysis confirms that Amazon forests have acted as a long-term net biomass sink, we find a long-term decreasing trend of carbon accumulation. Rates of net increase in above-ground biomass declined by one-third during the past decade compared to the 1990s. This is a consequence of growth rate increases levelling off recently, while biomass mortality persistently increased throughout, leading to a shortening of carbon residence times. Potential drivers for the mortality increase include greater climate variability, and feedbacks of faster growth on mortality, resulting in shortened tree longevity. The observed decline of the Amazon sink diverges markedly from the recent increase in terrestrial carbon uptake at the global scale, and is contrary to expectations based on models.

767 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
12 May 2017-Science
TL;DR: An estimate of global forest extent in dryland biomes is reported, based on analyzing more than 210,000 0.5-hectare sample plots through a photo-interpretation approach using large databases of satellite imagery at very high spatial resolution and very high temporal resolution, available through the Google Earth platform.
Abstract: Dryland biomes cover two-fifths of Earth’s land surface, but their forest area is poorly known. Here, we report an estimate of global forest extent in dryland biomes, based on analyzing more than 210,000 0.5-hectare sample plots through a photo-interpretation approach using large databases of satellite imagery at (i) very high spatial resolution and (ii) very high temporal resolution, which are available through the Google Earth platform. We show that in 2015, 1327 million hectares of drylands had more than 10% tree-cover, and 1079 million hectares comprised forest. Our estimate is 40 to 47% higher than previous estimates, corresponding to 467 million hectares of forest that have never been reported before. This increases current estimates of global forest cover by at least 9%.

302 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Sophie Fauset1, Michelle O. Johnson1, Manuel Gloor1, Timothy R. Baker1, Abel Monteagudo M2, Roel J. W. Brienen1, Ted R. Feldpausch3, Gabriela Lopez-Gonzalez1, Yadvinder Malhi4, Hans ter Steege5, Nigel C. A. Pitman6, Christopher Baraloto7, Julien Engel8, Pascal Petronelli, Ana Andrade9, José Luís Camargo9, Susan G. Laurance10, William F. Laurance10, Jérôme Chave11, Elodie Allie, Percy Núñez Vargas2, John Terborgh6, Kalle Ruokolainen12, Marcos Silveira13, Gerardo A. Aymard C, Luzmila Arroyo14, Damien Bonal15, Hirma Ramírez-Angulo16, Alejandro Araujo-Murakami14, David A. Neill, Bruno Hérault, Aurélie Dourdain, Armando Torres-Lezama16, Beatriz Schwantes Marimon17, Rafael de Paiva Salomão18, James A. Comiskey19, Maxime Réjou-Méchain11, Marisol Toledo14, Juan Carlos Licona, Alfredo Alarcón, Adriana Prieto20, Agustín Rudas20, Peter J. Van Der Meer21, Timothy J. Killeen22, Ben-Hur Marimon Junior17, Lourens Poorter23, René G. A. Boot23, Basil Stergios, Emilio Vilanova Torre16, Flávia R. C. Costa9, Carolina Levis9, Juliana Schietti9, Priscila Souza9, Nikée Groot1, Eric Arets23, Victor Chama Moscoso2, Wendeson Castro13, Eurídice N. Honorio Coronado, Marielos Peña-Claros23, Clément Stahl15, Jorcely Barroso13, Joey Talbot1, Ima Célia Guimarães Vieira18, Geertje M. F. van der Heijden24, Raquel Thomas25, Vincent A. Vos, Everton Cristo de Almeida26, Esteban Alvarez Dávila, Luiz E. O. C. Aragão27, Terry L. Erwin28, Paulo S. Morandi17, Edmar Almeida de Oliveira17, Marco Bruno Xavier Valadão17, Roderick Zagt29, Peter van der Hout, Patricia Alvarez Loayza6, John Pipoly30, Ophelia Wang31, Miguel Alexiades32, Carlos Cerón33, Isau Huamantupa-Chuquimaco2, Anthony Di Fiore34, Julie Peacock1, Nadir Pallqui Camacho2, Ricardo Keichi Umetsu17, Plínio Barbosa de Camargo35, Robyn J. Burnham36, Rafael Herrera37, Carlos A. Quesada9, Juliana Stropp, Simone Aparecida Vieira38, Marc K. Steininger39, Carlos Reynel Rodriguez40, Zorayda Restrepo, Adriane Esquivel Muelbert1, Simon L. Lewis41, Georgia Pickavance1, Oliver L. Phillips1 
TL;DR: It is found that dominance of forest function is even more concentrated in a few species than is dominance of tree abundance, with only ≈1% of Amazon tree species responsible for 50% of carbon storage and productivity.
Abstract: While Amazonian forests are extraordinarily diverse, the abundance of trees is skewed strongly towards relatively few 'hyperdominant' species. In addition to their diversity, Amazonian trees are a key component of the global carbon cycle, assimilating and storing more carbon than any other ecosystem on Earth. Here we ask, using a unique data set of 530 forest plots, if the functions of storing and producing woody carbon are concentrated in a small number of tree species, whether the most abundant species also dominate carbon cycling, and whether dominant species are characterized by specific functional traits. We find that dominance of forest function is even more concentrated in a few species than is dominance of tree abundance, with only ≈1% of Amazon tree species responsible for 50% of carbon storage and productivity. Although those species that contribute most to biomass and productivity are often abundant, species maximum size is also influential, while the identity and ranking of dominant species varies by function and by region.

229 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the impact of the 2010 Amazon drought on forest dynamics using ground-based observations of mortality and growth from an extensive forest plot network and found that during the 2010 drought interval, forests did not gain biomass (net change: −0.43
Abstract: The Amazon Basin has experienced more variable climate over the last decade, with a severe and widespread drought in 2005 causing large basin-wide losses of biomass. A drought of similar climatological magnitude occurred again in 2010; however, there has been no basin-wide ground-based evaluation of effects on vegetation. We examine to what extent the 2010 drought affected forest dynamics using ground-based observations of mortality and growth from an extensive forest plot network. We find that during the 2010 drought interval, forests did not gain biomass (net change: −0.43 Mg ha−1, confidence interval (CI): −1.11, 0.19, n = 97), regardless of whether forests experienced precipitation deficit anomalies. This contrasted with a long-term biomass sink during the baseline pre-2010 drought period (1998 to pre-2010) of 1.33 Mg ha−1 yr−1 (CI: 0.90, 1.74, p < 0.01). The resulting net impact of the 2010 drought (i.e., reversal of the baseline net sink) was −1.95 Mg ha−1 yr−1 (CI:−2.77, −1.18; p < 0.001). This net biomass impact was driven by an increase in biomass mortality (1.45 Mg ha−1 yr−1 CI: 0.66, 2.25, p < 0.001) and a decline in biomass productivity (−0.50 Mg ha−1 yr−1, CI:−0.78, −0.31; p < 0.001). Surprisingly, the magnitude of the losses through tree mortality was unrelated to estimated local precipitation anomalies and was independent of estimated local pre-2010 drought history. Thus, there was no evidence that pre-2010 droughts compounded the effects of the 2010 drought. We detected a systematic basin-wide impact of the 2010 drought on tree growth rates across Amazonia, which was related to the strength of the moisture deficit. This impact differed from the drought event in 2005 which did not affect productivity. Based on these ground data, live biomass in trees and corresponding estimates of live biomass in lianas and roots, we estimate that intact forests in Amazonia were carbon neutral in 2010 (−0.07 Pg C yr−1 CI:−0.42, 0.23), consistent with results from an independent analysis of airborne estimates of land-atmospheric fluxes during 2010. Relative to the long-term mean, the 2010 drought resulted in a reduction in biomass carbon uptake of 1.1 Pg C, compared to 1.6 Pg C for the 2005 event.

183 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors identify ten contrasting perspectives that shape the vulnerability debate but have not been discussed collectively and present a set of global vulnerability drivers that are known with high confidence: (1) droughts eventually occur everywhere; (2) warming produces hotter Droughts; (3) atmospheric moisture demand increases nonlinearly with temperature during drought; (4) mortality can occur faster in hotter Drought, consistent with fundamental physiology; (5) shorter Drought can become lethal under warming, increasing the frequency of lethal Drought; and (6) mortality happens rapidly
Abstract: Patterns, mechanisms, projections, and consequences of tree mortality and associated broad-scale forest die-off due to drought accompanied by warmer temperatures—“hotter drought”, an emerging characteristic of the Anthropocene—are the focus of rapidly expanding literature. Despite recent observational, experimental, and modeling studies suggesting increased vulnerability of trees to hotter drought and associated pests and pathogens, substantial debate remains among research, management and policy-making communities regarding future tree mortality risks. We summarize key mortality-relevant findings, differentiating between those implying lesser versus greater levels of vulnerability. Evidence suggesting lesser vulnerability includes forest benefits of elevated [CO2] and increased water-use efficiency; observed and modeled increases in forest growth and canopy greening; widespread increases in woody-plant biomass, density, and extent; compensatory physiological, morphological, and genetic mechanisms; dampening ecological feedbacks; and potential mitigation by forest management. In contrast, recent studies document more rapid mortality under hotter drought due to negative tree physiological responses and accelerated biotic attacks. Additional evidence suggesting greater vulnerability includes rising background mortality rates; projected increases in drought frequency, intensity, and duration; limitations of vegetation models such as inadequately represented mortality processes; warming feedbacks from die-off; and wildfire synergies. Grouping these findings we identify ten contrasting perspectives that shape the vulnerability debate but have not been discussed collectively. We also present a set of global vulnerability drivers that are known with high confidence: (1) droughts eventually occur everywhere; (2) warming produces hotter droughts; (3) atmospheric moisture demand increases nonlinearly with temperature during drought; (4) mortality can occur faster in hotter drought, consistent with fundamental physiology; (5) shorter droughts occur more frequently than longer droughts and can become lethal under warming, increasing the frequency of lethal drought nonlinearly; and (6) mortality happens rapidly relative to growth intervals needed for forest recovery. These high-confidence drivers, in concert with research supporting greater vulnerability perspectives, support an overall viewpoint of greater forest vulnerability globally. We surmise that mortality vulnerability is being discounted in part due to difficulties in predicting threshold responses to extreme climate events. Given the profound ecological and societal implications of underestimating global vulnerability to hotter drought, we highlight urgent challenges for research, management, and policy-making communities.

1,786 citations

01 Dec 2010
TL;DR: In this article, the authors suggest a reduction in the global NPP of 0.55 petagrams of carbon, which would not only weaken the terrestrial carbon sink, but would also intensify future competition between food demand and biofuel production.
Abstract: Terrestrial net primary production (NPP) quantifies the amount of atmospheric carbon fixed by plants and accumulated as biomass. Previous studies have shown that climate constraints were relaxing with increasing temperature and solar radiation, allowing an upward trend in NPP from 1982 through 1999. The past decade (2000 to 2009) has been the warmest since instrumental measurements began, which could imply continued increases in NPP; however, our estimates suggest a reduction in the global NPP of 0.55 petagrams of carbon. Large-scale droughts have reduced regional NPP, and a drying trend in the Southern Hemisphere has decreased NPP in that area, counteracting the increased NPP over the Northern Hemisphere. A continued decline in NPP would not only weaken the terrestrial carbon sink, but it would also intensify future competition between food demand and proposed biofuel production.

1,780 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
05 Jul 2019-Science
TL;DR: There is room for an extra 0.9 billion hectares of canopy cover, which could store 205 gigatonnes of carbon in areas that would naturally support woodlands and forests, which highlights global tree restoration as one of the most effective carbon drawdown solutions to date.
Abstract: The restoration of trees remains among the most effective strategies for climate change mitigation. We mapped the global potential tree coverage to show that 4.4 billion hectares of canopy cover could exist under the current climate. Excluding existing trees and agricultural and urban areas, we found that there is room for an extra 0.9 billion hectares of canopy cover, which could store 205 gigatonnes of carbon in areas that would naturally support woodlands and forests. This highlights global tree restoration as our most effective climate change solution to date. However, climate change will alter this potential tree coverage. We estimate that if we cannot deviate from the current trajectory, the global potential canopy cover may shrink by ~223 million hectares by 2050, with the vast majority of losses occurring in the tropics. Our results highlight the opportunity of climate change mitigation through global tree restoration but also the urgent need for action.

1,052 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
11 Nov 2016-Science
TL;DR: The full range and scale of climate change effects on global biodiversity that have been observed in natural systems are described, and a set of core ecological processes that underpin ecosystem functioning and support services to people are identified.
Abstract: Most ecological processes now show responses to anthropogenic climate change. In terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems, species are changing genetically, physiologically, morphologically, and phenologically and are shifting their distributions, which affects food webs and results in new interactions. Disruptions scale from the gene to the ecosystem and have documented consequences for people, including unpredictable fisheries and crop yields, loss of genetic diversity in wild crop varieties, and increasing impacts of pests and diseases. In addition to the more easily observed changes, such as shifts in flowering phenology, we argue that many hidden dynamics, such as genetic changes, are also taking place. Understanding shifts in ecological processes can guide human adaptation strategies. In addition to reducing greenhouse gases, climate action and policy must therefore focus equally on strategies that safeguard biodiversity and ecosystems.

815 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
31 Jul 2015-Science
TL;DR: P pervasive and substantial “legacy effects” of reduced growth and incomplete recovery for 1 to 4 years after severe drought were found, most prevalent in dry ecosystems, among Pinaceae, and among species with low hydraulic safety margins.
Abstract: The impacts of climate extremes on terrestrial ecosystems are poorly understood but important for predicting carbon cycle feedbacks to climate change. Coupled climate-carbon cycle models typically assume that vegetation recovery from extreme drought is immediate and complete, which conflicts with the understanding of basic plant physiology. We examined the recovery of stem growth in trees after severe drought at 1338 forest sites across the globe, comprising 49,339 site-years, and compared the results with simulated recovery in climate-vegetation models. We found pervasive and substantial "legacy effects" of reduced growth and incomplete recovery for 1 to 4 years after severe drought. Legacy effects were most prevalent in dry ecosystems, among Pinaceae, and among species with low hydraulic safety margins. In contrast, limited or no legacy effects after drought were simulated by current climate-vegetation models. Our results highlight hysteresis in ecosystem-level carbon cycling and delayed recovery from climate extremes.

768 citations