Sentences with phrase «change in vegetation carbon»

Mean change in vegetation carbon at +4 °C global land warming from a 1971 — 1999 baseline.

Changes in vegetation carbon residence times can cause major shifts in the distribution of carbon between pools, overall fluxes, and the time constants of terrestrial carbon transitions, with consequences for the land carbon balance and the associated state of ecosystems.

Not exact matches

With global climate models projecting further drying over the Amazon in the future, the potential loss of vegetation and the associated loss of carbon storage may speed up global climate change.

Dr Sue Ward, the Senior Research Associate for the project at Lancaster University, said: «Peat is one of the earth's most important stores of carbon, but one of the most vulnerable to changes in climate and changes in vegetation caused by both climate and land management.

Instruments on the platforms will monitor changes in the concentrations of gases such carbon dioxide, which is mainly produced when vegetation is burnt during the dry season.

To explore how well the timing of the changes matched up, the researcher focused on a carbon isotope called 13C, which is retained in soil in the same proportions as in the vegetation the soil once contained.

Weather conditions strongly affect the litter production by vegetation and the decomposition of organic matter, in particular, and thus soil carbon stock changes.

Desertification also contributes to climate change, with land degradation and related loss of vegetation resulting in increased emissions and reduced carbon sink.

A study in Science says that tropical forests are now net sources of CO2: Here we use 12 years (2003 — 2014) of MODIS pantropical satellite data to quantify net annual changes in the aboveground carbon density of tropical woody live vegetation, providing direct, measurement - based evidence that the world's tropical forests are a net carbon source of 425.2 ± 92.0 Tg C yr — 1.

I never said that modest changes in vegetation would act as a sink for all the carbon emissions.

Based on evidence from Earth's history, we suggest here that the relevant form of climate sensitivity in the Anthropocene (e.g. from which to base future greenhouse gas (GHG) stabilization targets) is the Earth system sensitivity including fast feedbacks from changes in water vapour, natural aerosols, clouds and sea ice, slower surface albedo feedbacks from changes in continental ice sheets and vegetation, and climate — GHG feedbacks from changes in natural (land and ocean) carbon sinks.

They have vegetation that responds to temperature and rainfall, and, in turn, changes both the uptake and release of carbon to the atmosphere.

Houghton's method of reconstructing Land - Use Based Net Flux of Carbon appears arbitrary and susceptible to bias; i.e. «Rates of land - use change, including clearing for agriculture and harvest of wood, were reconstructed from statistical and historic documents for 9 world regions and used, along with the per ha [hectare] changes in vegetation and soil that result from land management, to calculate the annual flux of carbon between land and atmosphere.»

Biological carbon storage in vegetation, soils, trees, and aquatic areas got a boost from the White House, the private sector, and the American Forest Foundation, which announced programs to make natural systems more resilient to climate change, aid plants in capturing carbon, and incorporate natural systems into infrastructure design.

So I think, around the carbon budgets, a question that I would like to see more clarity on is whether land - based vegetation will continue to absorb carbon dioxide at the rate it currently is, or whether in a future climate, that drawdown of carbon by plants on land will change.

Here we use 12 years (2003 — 2014) of MODIS pantropical satellite data to quantify net annual changes in the aboveground carbon density of tropical woody live vegetation, providing direct, measurement - based evidence that the world's tropical forests are a net carbon source of 425.2 ± 92.0 Tg C yr — 1.

Broad - scale changes in vegetation in general, and tree loss in particular, have pronounced effects on climate processes through biogeophysical mechanisms such as albedo, evapotranspiration (ET), and carbon dioxide exchange with the atmosphere [11].

In addition, Earth system models predict carbon loss by placing vegetation at a given point, and then changing various climate properties above it.

We find, when all seven models are considered for one representative concentration pathway × general circulation model combination, such uncertainties explain 30 % more variation in modeled vegetation carbon change than responses of net primary productivity alone, increasing to 151 % for non-HYBRID4 models.

Change in mean - decadal vegetation carbon, annual NPP, and vegetation carbon residence time simulated by seven GVMs under HadGEM2 - ES RCP 8.5 forcings between A.D. 2005 and 2099.

(A — C) Change in annual global mean vegetation carbon (A), NPP (B), and residence time of carbon in vegetation (C) under the HadGEM2 - ES RCP 8.5 climate and CO2 scenario for seven global vegetation models.

They include the physical, chemical and biological processes that control the oceanic storage of carbon, and are calibrated against geochemical and isotopic constraints on how ocean carbon storage has changed over the decades and carbon storage in terrestrial vegetation and soils, and how it responds to increasing CO2, temperature, rainfall and other factors.

Future global vegetation carbon change calculated by seven global vegetation models using climate outputs and associated increasing CO2 from five GCMs run with four RCPs, expressed as the change from the 1971 — 1999 mean relative to change in global mean land temperature.

The comparison found that climate change will spark a growth in high - latitude vegetation, which will pull in more carbon from the atmosphere than thawing permafrost will release.

Estimating the carbon stocks in terrestrial ecosystems and accounting for changes in these stocks requires adequate information on land cover, carbon density in vegetation and soils, and the fate of carbon (burning, removals, decomposition).

Indeed, the long lifetime of fossil fuel carbon in the climate system and persistence of the ocean warming ensure that «slow» feedbacks, such as ice sheet disintegration, changes of the global vegetation distribution, melting of permafrost, and possible release of methane from methane hydrates on continental shelves, would also have time to come into play.

Double CO2 climate scenarios increase wildfire events by 40 - 50 % in California (Fried et al., 2004), and double fire risk in Cape Fynbos (Midgley et al., 2005), favouring re-sprouting plants in Fynbos (Bond and Midgley, 2003), fire - tolerant shrub dominance in the Mediterranean Basin (Mouillot et al., 2002), and vegetation structural change in California (needle - leaved to broad - leaved trees, trees to grasses) and reducing productivity and carbon sequestration (Lenihan et al., 2003).

The carbon biogeochemical cycle in CLM4 calculates changes in vegetation and wildfire occurrences, both of which depend on hydrological conditions (Thonicke et al. 2001; Kloster et al. 2010).

Impacts of large - scale and persistent changes in the MOC are likely to include changes to marine ecosystem productivity, fisheries, ocean carbon dioxide uptake, oceanic oxygen concentrations and terrestrial vegetation [Working Group I Fourth Assessment 10.3, 10.7; Working Group II Fourth Assessment 12.6, 19.3].

While others have looked at how changes in climate and in carbon dioxide concentrations may affect vegetation, Reilly and colleagues added to that mix changes in tropospheric ozone.

Unless the land use changes are permanently away from vegetation, as in paving a large area, the net carbon emissions are zero since whatever gets removed will grow back and thus consume the excess CO2.

There are a couple of lines in IPCC Working Group I («New coupled climate - carbon models (Betts et al., 2004; Huntingford et al., 2004) demonstrate the possibility of large feedbacks between future climate change and vegetation change, discussed further in Section 7.3.5 (i.e., a die back of Amazon vegetation and reductions in Amazon precipitation).»).

The big question is: How will the exchange of carbon between vegetation and the atmosphere change in the decades to come?