Terrestrial ecosystems sequester 2.1 Pg of atmospheric carbon annually. A large amount of the terrestrial sink is realized by forests. However, considerable uncertainties remain regarding the fate of this carbon over both short and long timescales. Relevant data to address these uncertainties are being collected at many sites around the world, but syntheses of these data are still sparse. To facilitate future synthesis activities, we have assembled a comprehensive global database for forest ecosystems, which includes carbon budget variables (fluxes and stocks), ecosystem traits (e.g. leaf area index, age), as well as ancillary site information such as management regime, climate, and soil characteristics. This publicly available database can be used to quantify global, regional or biome-specific carbon budgets; to re-examine established relationships; to test emerging hypotheses about ecosystem functioning [e.g. a constant net ecosystem production (NEP) to gross primary production (GPP) ratio]; and as benchmarks for model evaluations. In this paper, we present the first analysis of this database. We discuss the climatic influences on GPP, net primary production (NPP) and NEP and present the CO 2 balances for boreal, temperate, and tropical forest biomes based on micrometeorological, ecophysiological, and biometric flux and inventory estimates. Globally, GPP of forests benefited from higher temperatures and precipitation whereas NPP saturated above either a threshold of 1500 mm precipitation or a mean annual temperature of 10 1C. The global pattern in NEP was insensitive to climate and is hypothesized to be mainly determined by nonclimatic conditions such as successional stage, management, site history, and site disturbance. In all biomes, closing the CO 2 balance required the introduction of substantial biome-specific closure terms. Nonclosure was taken as an indication that respiratory processes, advection, and non-CO 2 carbon fluxes are not presently being adequately accounted for. Nomenclauture:DOC 5 dissolved organic carbon; fNPP 5 foliage component of NPP; GPP 5 gross primary production (GPP40 denotes photosynthetic uptake); mNPP 5 missing component of NPP;NBP 5 net biome production (NBP40 denotes biome uptake); NECB 5 net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB40 denotes ecosystem uptake); NEE 5 net ecosystem exchange (NEE40 denotes ecosystem uptake); NEP 5 net ecosystem production (NEP40 denotes ecosystem uptake); NPP 5 net primary production (NPP40 denotes ecosystem uptake); R a 5 autotrophic respiration (R a 40 denotes respiratory losses); R e 5 ecosystem respiration (R e 40 denotes respiratory losses); R h 5 heterotrophic respiration (R h 40 denotes respiratory losses); rNPP 5 root component of NPP;R s 5 soil respiration (R s 40 denotes respiratory losses); VOC 5 volatile organic compounds; wNPP 5 wood component of NPP

No abstract

Models and observational strategies of carbon exchange need to take into account synoptic and mesoscale transport for correct interpretation of the relation between surface fluxes and atmospheric concentration gradients.A dequate quantification of the geographical distribution of sources and sinks of C02 is still a major task with considerable implications for both our understanding of the global climate and the possible opportunities to mitigate climate change. Atmospheric measurements of C02 mixing ratios at a number of locations around the globe have helped significantly to quantify the source-sink distribu-AFFILIATIONS: DOLMAN, TOLK, AND

No abstract

The Sixth and Seventh Conference of the Parties (COP 6 and 7) at The Hague, Bonn and Marrakesh came to a final Agreement on the Kyoto Protocol, which is thus ready for ratification by the individual nations. The Agreement was only achieved by allowing countries to offset their fossil fuel emission targets (on average 95% of the 1990 emissions) by increasing biological carbon sequestration, and by trading carbon credits. Activities that would count as increasing biological carbon sequestration include afforestation and reforestation, and changes in management of agriculture and forestry. According to the Agreement reached in Marrakesh, biological carbon sequestration may reach an offset of up to 80% of the required reduction in fossil fuel emissions (4% of the 5% reduction commitment). We explain why the allowable offset rose as high during the course of the negotiations. It is highlighted that major unintended consequences may be a result of the policy as it stands in the Marrakesh Accord. Major losses of biodiversity and primary forest are expected. We present scientific concerns regarding verification, which lead to scientific doubts that the practices encouraged by the Agreement can actually increase sequestration under a full carbon accounting scheme. We explain that there is a ‘win‐win’ option that would protect high carbon pools and biodiversity in an economically efficient way. But, this is not supported by the Agreement. Despite the very positive signal that most nations of the United Nations will devote major efforts towards climate protection, there remains a most urgent need to develop additional rules to avoid unintended outcomes, and to promote the ‘win‐win’ options that we explain.