Reply to: Old-growth forest carbon sinks overestimated (original) (raw)

Nature volume 591, pages E24–E25 (2021) Cite this article

Subjects

replying to: P. Gundersen et al. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03266-z (2021)

Following re-analysis, Gundersen and collaborators[1](/articles/s41586-021-03267-y#ref-CR1 "Gundersen, P. Old-growth forest carbon sinks overestimated. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03266-z

             (2021).") found inconsistencies between the independent data they used and the flux measurements reported in our Letter[2](/articles/s41586-021-03267-y#ref-CR2 "Luyssaert, S. et al. Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature 455, 213–215 (2008)."). In the accompanying Comment[1](/articles/s41586-021-03267-y#ref-CR1 "Gundersen, P. Old-growth forest carbon sinks overestimated. Nature 
              https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03266-z
              
             (2021)."), each of these inconsistencies is then used to question the quality of the flux measurements, which, if correct, would indeed call for the refutation of the main message: that at present, forests continue to take up carbon even in old age[2](/articles/s41586-021-03267-y#ref-CR2 "Luyssaert, S. et al. Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature 455, 213–215 (2008)."). Although most of the points raised by Gundersen et al.[1](/articles/s41586-021-03267-y#ref-CR1 "Gundersen, P. Old-growth forest carbon sinks overestimated. Nature 
              https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03266-z
              
             (2021).") do call for further investigation, none provides unequivocal proof of consistently low-quality flux measurements.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

$32.99 / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 52 print issues and online access

$199.00 per year

only $3.83 per issue

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

References

  1. Gundersen, P. Old-growth forest carbon sinks overestimated. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03266-z (2021).
  2. Luyssaert, S. et al. Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature 455, 213–215 (2008).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  3. Yang, Y., Luo, Y. & Finzi, A. C. Carbon and nitrogen dynamics during forest stand development: a global synthesis. New Phytol. 190, 977–989 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  4. Pan, Y. et al. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science 333, 988–993 (2011).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  5. Fontaine, S. et al. Stability of organic carbon in deep soil layers controlled by fresh carbon supply. Nature 450, 277–280 (2007).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  6. Houlton, B. Z. & Dahlgren, R. A. Convergent evidence for widespread rock nitrogen sources in Earth’s surface environment. Science 62, 58–62 (2018).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
  7. Anderegg, W. R. L. et al. Climate-driven risks to the climate mitigation potential of forests. Science 368, eaaz7005 (2020).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  8. Hyvönen, R. et al. The likely impact of elevated [CO2], nitrogen deposition, increased temperature and management on carbon sequestration in temperate and boreal forest ecosystems: a literature review. New Phytol. 173, 463–480 (2006).
    Article Google Scholar
  9. Clark, D. A. et al. Net primary production in tropical forests: an evaluation and synthesis of existing field data. Ecol. Appl. 11, 371–384 (2001).
    Article Google Scholar
  10. Wharton, S. & Falk, M. Climate indices strongly influence old-growth forest carbon exchange. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 044016 (2016).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
  11. Campioli, M. et al. Evaluating the convergence between eddy-covariance and biometric methods for assessing carbon budgets of forests. Nat. Commun. 7, 13717 (2016).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  12. Luyssaert, S. et al. Toward a consistency cross-check of eddy covariance flux-based and biometric estimates of ecosystem carbon balance. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 23, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003377 (2009).
  13. Nord-Larsen, T., Vesterdal, L., Bentsen, N. S. & Larsen, J. B. Ecosystem carbon stocks and their temporal resilience in a semi-natural beech-dominated forest. For. Ecol. Manage. 447, 67–76 (2019).
    Article Google Scholar
  14. Kwon, H., Law, B. E., Thomas, C. K. & Johnson, B. G. The influence of hydrological variability on inherent water use efficiency in forests of contrasting composition, age, and precipitation regimes in the Pacific Northwest U.S. Agric. For. Meteorol. 249, 488–500 (2018).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
  15. Law, B. E. & Berner, L. T. NACP TERRA-PNW: Forest Plant Traits, NPP, Biomass, and Soil Properties 1999–2014 https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1292 (ORNL DAAC, 2015).
  16. Falk, M., Wharton, S., Schroeder, M., Ustin, S. L. & Paw, U. K. T. Flux partitioning in an old-growth forest: seasonal and interannual dynamics. Tree Physiol. 28, 509–520 (2008).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  17. FLUXNET2015 Dataset: Data Processing https://fluxnet.fluxdata.org/data/fluxnet2015-dataset/data-processing/ (Fluxnet, accessed 25 April 2020).
  18. Potapov, P. et al. The last frontiers of wilderness: tracking loss of intact forest landscapes from 2000 to 2013. Sci. Adv. 3, e1600821 (2017).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
  19. Magnani, F. et al. The human footprint in the carbon cycle of temperate and boreal forests. Nature 447, 849–851 (2007).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  20. Jiang, M. et al. The fate of carbon in a mature forest under carbon dioxide enrichment. Nature 580, 227–231 (2020).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  21. Zhou, G. et al. Old-growth forests can accumulate carbon in soils. Science 314, 1417–1417 (2006).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
  22. Nabuurs, G.-J. et al. First signs of carbon sink saturation in European forest biomass. Nat. Clim. Chang. 3, 792–796 (2013).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Sebastiaan Luyssaert
  2. Max-Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena, Germany
    E.-Detlef Schulze
  3. Bioclimatology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
    Alexander Knohl
  4. College of Forestry, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
    Beverly E. Law
  5. Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement (LSCE/IPSL), CEA-CNRS-UVSQ, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
    Philippe Ciais
  6. School of GeoSciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
    John Grace

Authors

  1. Sebastiaan Luyssaert
  2. E.-Detlef Schulze
  3. Alexander Knohl
  4. Beverly E. Law
  5. Philippe Ciais
  6. John Grace

Contributions

All authors contributed to the writing of the Matters Arising Reply. We could not reach Annett Börner and Dominik Hessenmöller, who co-authored the original study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence toSebastiaan Luyssaert.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Luyssaert, S., Schulze, ED., Knohl, A. et al. Reply to: Old-growth forest carbon sinks overestimated.Nature 591, E24–E25 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03267-y

Download citation

This article is cited by

Associated content