Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • NEWS AND VIEWS

Southeast Amazonia is no longer a carbon sink

Atmospheric measurements show that deforestation and rapid local warming have reduced or eliminated the capacity of the eastern Amazonian forest to absorb carbon dioxide — with worrying implications for future global warming.
  1. Scott Denning

    1. Scott Denning is in the Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523, USA.

    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed  Google Scholar

Since at least the inception of modern records of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels in the 1950s, there has been a small global excess (about 2%) in the amount of CO2 taken up by land plants for photosynthesis, compared with the amount emitted as a result of the decomposition of organic material. This land carbon sink has absorbed around 25% of all fossil-fuel emissions since 1960 (ref. 1)1, offsetting some global warming. Tropical forests have been a major component of the land carbon sink, and the largest intact tropical forest is in Amazonia. Writing in Nature, Gatti et al.2 report extensive direct sampling of the atmosphere over this region. Their data reveal that western Amazonia is still a relatively weak carbon sink, but suggest that deforestation and warming over eastern Amazonia have degraded — or even reversed — regional uptake of carbon by the forest.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

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

Nature 595, 354-355 (2021)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01871-6

References

  1. Friedlingstein, P. et al. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 12, 3269–3340 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gatti, L. V. et al. Nature 595, 388–393 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fung, I. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 48, 1–20 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Pan, Y. et al. Science 333, 988–993 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Song, X.-P. et al. Nature 560, 639–643 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Aragão, L. E. O. C. et al. Nature Commun. 9, 536 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hayek, M. N. et al. Biogeosciences 15, 4833–4848 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Malhi, Y. et al. Biol. Conserv. 253, 108889 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Liu, J. et al. Science 358, eaam5690 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Marengo, J. A., Liebmann, B.,Kousky, V. E., Filizola, N. P. & Wainer, I. C. J. Clim. 14, 833–852 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ballantyne, A. P., Alden, C. B., Miller, J. B., Tans, P. P. & White, J. W. C. Nature 488, 70–72 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hubau, W. et al. Nature 579, 80–87 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kaushik, A. et al. Eos 101, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020EO140276 (2020).

Download references

Competing Interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Subjects

Latest on:

Nature Careers

Jobs

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing

Search

Advanced search

Quick links