Browsing by Autor "Abel Monteagudo Mendoza"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5

Evolutionary heritage influences Amazon tree ecology
(Royal Society, 2016) Fernanda Coelho de Souza; Kyle G. Dexter; Oliver L. Phillips; Roel J. W. Brienen; Jérôme Chave; David Galbraith; Gabriela López‐González; Abel Monteagudo Mendoza; R. Toby Pennington; Lourens Poorter
Lineages tend to retain ecological characteristics of their ancestors through time. However, for some traits, selection during evolutionary history may have also played a role in determining trait values. To address the relative importance of these processes requires large-scale quantification of traits and evolutionary relationships among species. The Amazonian tree flora comprises a high diversity of angiosperm lineages and species with widely differing life-history characteristics, providing an excellent system to investigate the combined influences of evolutionary heritage and selection in determining trait variation. We used trait data related to the major axes of life-history variation among tropical trees (e.g. growth and mortality rates) from 577 inventory plots in closed-canopy forest, mapped onto a phylogenetic hypothesis spanning more than 300 genera including all major angiosperm clades to test for evolutionary constraints on traits. We found significant phylogenetic signal (PS) for all traits, consistent with evolutionarily related genera having more similar characteristics than expected by chance. Although there is also evidence for repeated evolution of pioneer and shade tolerant life-history strategies within independent lineages, the existence of significant PS allows clearer predictions of the links between evolutionary diversity, ecosystem function and the response of tropical forests to global change.
Increasing dominance of large lianas in Amazonian forests
(Nature Portfolio, 2002) Oliver L. Phillips; Ramsés V. Martínez; Luzmila Arroyo; T. R. Baker; Timothy J. Killeen; Simon L. Lewis; Y. Malhi; Abel Monteagudo Mendoza; David Neill; P. Núñez Vargas
Seasonal drought limits tree species across the Neotropics
(Wiley, 2016) Adriane Esquivel‐Muelbert; Timothy R. Baker; Kyle G. Dexter; Simon L. Lewis; Hans ter Steege; Gabriela López‐González; Abel Monteagudo Mendoza; Roel Brienen; Ted R. Feldpausch; Nigel C. A. Pitman
Within the tropics, the species richness of tree communities is strongly and positively associated with precipitation. Previous research has suggested that this macroecological pattern is driven by the negative effect of water‐stress on the physiological processes of most tree species. This implies that the range limits of taxa are defined by their ability to occur under dry conditions, and thus in terms of species distributions predicts a nested pattern of taxa distribution from wet to dry areas. However, this ‘dry‐tolerance’ hypothesis has yet to be adequately tested at large spatial and taxonomic scales. Here, using a dataset of 531 inventory plots of closed canopy forest distributed across the western Neotropics we investigated how precipitation, evaluated both as mean annual precipitation and as the maximum climatological water deficit, influences the distribution of tropical tree species, genera and families. We find that the distributions of tree taxa are indeed nested along precipitation gradients in the western Neotropics. Taxa tolerant to seasonal drought are disproportionally widespread across the precipitation gradient, with most reaching even the wettest climates sampled; however, most taxa analysed are restricted to wet areas. Our results suggest that the ‘dry tolerance' hypothesis has broad applicability in the world's most species‐rich forests. In addition, the large number of species restricted to wetter conditions strongly indicates that an increased frequency of drought could severely threaten biodiversity in this region. Overall, this study establishes a baseline for exploring how tropical forest tree composition may change in response to current and future environmental changes in this region.
Tree height integrated into pan-tropical forest biomass estimates
(2012) Ted R. Feldpausch; Jon Lloyd; Simon L. Lewis; Roel Brienen; Emanuel Gloor; Abel Monteagudo Mendoza; Gabriela López‐González; Lindsay F. Banin; Kamariah Abu Salim; Kofi Affum‐Baffoe
Abstract. Above-ground tropical tree biomass and carbon storage estimates commonly ignore tree height. We estimate the effect of incorporating height (H) on forest biomass estimates using 37 625 concomitant H and diameter measurements (n = 327 plots) and 1816 harvested trees (n = 21 plots) tropics-wide to answer the following questions: 1. For trees of known biomass (from destructive harvests) which H-model form and geographic scale (plot, region, and continent) most reduces biomass estimate uncertainty? 2. How much does including H relationship estimates derived in (1) reduce uncertainty in biomass estimates across 327 plots spanning four continents? 3. What effect does the inclusion of H in biomass estimates have on plot- and continental-scale forest biomass estimates? The mean relative error in biomass estimates of the destructively harvested trees was half (mean 0.06) when including H, compared to excluding H (mean 0.13). The power- and Weibull-H asymptotic model provided the greatest reduction in uncertainty, with the regional Weibull-H model preferred because it reduces uncertainty in smaller-diameter classes that contain the bulk of biomass per hectare in most forests. Propagating the relationships from destructively harvested tree biomass to each of the 327 plots from across the tropics shows errors are reduced from 41.8 Mg ha−1 (range 6.6 to 112.4) to 8.0 Mg ha−1 (−2.5 to 23.0) when including $H$. For all plots, above-ground live biomass was 52.2±17.3 Mg ha−1 lower when including H estimates (13%), with the greatest reductions in estimated biomass in Brazilian Shield forests and relatively no change in the Guyana Shield, central Africa and southeast Asia. We show fundamentally different stand structure across the four forested tropical continents, which affects biomass reductions due to $H$. African forests store a greater portion of total biomass in large-diameter trees and trees are on average larger in diameter. This contrasts to forests on all other continents where smaller-diameter trees contain the greatest fractions of total biomass. After accounting for variation in $H$, total biomass per hectare is greatest in Australia, the Guyana Shield, and Asia and lowest in W. Africa, W. Amazonia, and the Brazilian Shield (descending order). Thus, if closed canopy tropical forests span 1668 million km2 and store 285 Pg C, then the overestimate is 35 Pg C if H is ignored, and the sampled plots are an unbiased statistical representation of all tropical forest in terms of biomass and height factors. Our results show that tree $H$ is an important allometric factor that needs to be included in future forest biomass estimates to reduce error in estimates of pantropical carbon stocks and emissions due to deforestation.
Tree height integrated into pantropical forest biomass estimates
(Copernicus Publications, 2012) Ted R. Feldpausch; Jon Lloyd; Simon L. Lewis; Roel Brienen; Manuel Gloor; Abel Monteagudo Mendoza; Gabriela López‐González; Lindsay F. Banin; Kamariah Abu Salim; Kofi Affum‐Baffoe
Abstract. Aboveground tropical tree biomass and carbon storage estimates commonly ignore tree height (H). We estimate the effect of incorporating H on tropics-wide forest biomass estimates in 327 plots across four continents using 42 656 H and diameter measurements and harvested trees from 20 sites to answer the following questions: 1. What is the best H-model form and geographic unit to include in biomass models to minimise site-level uncertainty in estimates of destructive biomass? 2. To what extent does including H estimates derived in (1) reduce uncertainty in biomass estimates across all 327 plots? 3. What effect does accounting for H have on plot- and continental-scale forest biomass estimates? The mean relative error in biomass estimates of destructively harvested trees when including H (mean 0.06), was half that when excluding H (mean 0.13). Power- and Weibull-H models provided the greatest reduction in uncertainty, with regional Weibull-H models preferred because they reduce uncertainty in smaller-diameter classes (≤40 cm D) that store about one-third of biomass per hectare in most forests. Propagating the relationships from destructively harvested tree biomass to each of the 327 plots from across the tropics shows that including H reduces errors from 41.8 Mg ha−1 (range 6.6 to 112.4) to 8.0 Mg ha−1 (−2.5 to 23.0). For all plots, aboveground live biomass was −52.2 Mg ha−1 (−82.0 to −20.3 bootstrapped 95% CI), or 13%, lower when including H estimates, with the greatest relative reductions in estimated biomass in forests of the Brazilian Shield, east Africa, and Australia, and relatively little change in the Guiana Shield, central Africa and southeast Asia. Appreciably different stand structure was observed among regions across the tropical continents, with some storing significantly more biomass in small diameter stems, which affects selection of the best height models to reduce uncertainty and biomass reductions due to H. After accounting for variation in H, total biomass per hectare is greatest in Australia, the Guiana Shield, Asia, central and east Africa, and lowest in east-central Amazonia, W. Africa, W. Amazonia, and the Brazilian Shield (descending order). Thus, if tropical forests span 1668 million km2 and store 285 Pg C (estimate including H), then applying our regional relationships implies that carbon storage is overestimated by 35 Pg C (31–39 bootstrapped 95% CI) if H is ignored, assuming that the sampled plots are an unbiased statistical representation of all tropical forest in terms of biomass and height factors. Our results show that tree H is an important allometric factor that needs to be included in future forest biomass estimates to reduce error in estimates of tropical carbon stocks and emissions due to deforestation.