<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">BG</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Biogeosciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">BG</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Biogeosciences</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1726-4189</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/bg-17-4999-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>Assessing impacts of selective logging on water, energy, and carbon budgets
and ecosystem dynamics in Amazon forests using the Functionally Assembled
Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator</article-title><alt-title>Assessing impacts of selective logging in tropical forests using FATES</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Assessing impacts of selective logging in tropical forests using FATES}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{M.~Huang et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>Maoyi</given-names></name>
          <email>maoyi.huang@pnnl.gov</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9154-9485</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Xu</surname><given-names>Yi</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3 aff4">
          <name><surname>Longo</surname><given-names>Marcos</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5062-6245</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3 aff4 aff5">
          <name><surname>Keller</surname><given-names>Michael</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0253-3359</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff6">
          <name><surname>Knox</surname><given-names>Ryan G.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff6">
          <name><surname>Koven</surname><given-names>Charles D.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3367-0065</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff7 aff8">
          <name><surname>Fisher</surname><given-names>Rosie A.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Atmospheric Sciences and Global Change Division, Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>School of Geography, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Embrapa Agricultural Informatics, Campinas, SP, Brazil</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, CA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>International Institute of Tropical Forestry, USDA Forest Service, Rio
Piedras, Puerto Rico, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff6"><label>6</label><institution>Earth &amp; Environmental Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff7"><label>7</label><institution>Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory, National Center for
Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff8"><label>8</label><institution>Centre Européen de Recherche et de Formation Avancée en Calcul Scientifique, Toulouse, France</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Maoyi Huang (maoyi.huang@pnnl.gov)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>19</day><month>October</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>17</volume>
      <issue>20</issue>
      <fpage>4999</fpage><lpage>5023</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>9</day><month>April</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>23</day><month>April</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>29</day><month>June</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>11</day><month>August</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 Maoyi Huang et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020.html">This article is available from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e184">Tropical forest degradation from logging, fire, and fragmentation not only
alters carbon stocks and carbon fluxes, but also impacts physical
land surface properties such as albedo and roughness length. Such impacts
are poorly quantified to date due to difficulties in accessing and
maintaining observational infrastructures, as well as the lack of proper modeling
tools for capturing the interactions among biophysical properties, ecosystem
demography, canopy structure, and biogeochemical cycling in tropical
forests. As a first step to address these limitations, we implemented a
selective logging module into the Functionally Assembled Terrestrial
Ecosystem Simulator (FATES) by mimicking the ecological, biophysical, and
biogeochemical processes following a logging event. The model can specify
the timing and aerial extent of logging events, splitting the logged forest
patch into disturbed and intact patches; determine the survivorship of
cohorts in the disturbed patch; and modifying the biomass and necromass
(total mass of coarse woody debris and litter) pools following logging. We
parameterized the logging module to reproduce a selective logging experiment
at the Tapajós National Forest in Brazil and benchmarked model outputs
against available field measurements. Our results suggest that the model
permits the coexistence of early and late successional functional types and
realistically characterizes the seasonality of water and carbon fluxes and
stocks, the forest structure and composition, and the ecosystem succession
following disturbance. However, the current version of FATES overestimates
water stress in the dry season and therefore fails to capture seasonal variation
in latent and sensible heat fluxes. Moreover, we observed a bias towards low
stem density and leaf area when compared to observations, suggesting that
improvements are needed in both carbon allocation and establishment of
trees. The effects of logging were assessed by different logging scenarios
to represent reduced impact and conventional logging practices, both with
high and low logging intensities. The model simulations suggest that in
comparison to old-growth forests the logged forests rapidly recover water
and energy fluxes in 1 to 3 years. In contrast, the recovery times for
carbon stocks, forest structure, and composition are more than 30 years
depending on logging practices and intensity. This study lays the foundation
to simulate land use change and forest degradation in FATES, which will be
an effective tool to directly represent forest management practices and
regeneration in the context of Earth system models.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

      <?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<?pagebreak page5000?><sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e198">Land cover and land use in tropical forest regions are highly dynamic, and
nearly all tropical forests are subject to significant human influence
(Martínez-Ramos et al., 2016; Dirzo et al., 2014). While old-growth tropical forests have been reported to
be carbon sinks that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through
photosynthesis, these forests could easily become carbon sources once
disturbed (Luyssaert et al., 2008). Using data from forest inventory and long-term
ecosystem carbon studies from 1990 to 2007, Pan et al. (2011) suggested a net
tropical forest can be a net source of carbon source of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Pg C yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> from land use change, consisting of a gross tropical deforestation
loss of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Pg C yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> that is partially offset by a
carbon uptake by tropical secondary forest regrowth of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Pg C yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. These estimates, however, do not account for a tropical forest that
has been degraded through the combined effects of selective logging (cutting
and removal of merchantable timber), fuelwood harvest, understory fires, and
fragmentation (Nepstad et al., 1999; Bradshaw et al., 2009). To date, the effects of forest degradation
remain poorly quantified. Recent studies suggested that degradation may
contribute to carbon loss 40 % as large as clear-cut deforestation
(Berenguer et al., 2014), and the emission from selective logging alone could be equivalent
to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % to 50 % of that from deforestation in the
tropical countries (Pearson et al., 2014; Huang and Asner, 2010; Asner et al., 2009). Selective logging of tropical
forests is an important contributor to many local and national economies and corresponds to approximately one-eighth of global timber (Blaser et al., 2011). The
integrated impact of timber production and other forest uses has been
posited as the cause of up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % of the difference
between potential and actual biomass stocks globally, comparable in
magnitude to the effects of deforestation (Erb et al., 2017). Selective
logging includes cutting large trees and additional degradation through
widespread damage to remaining trees, subcanopy vegetation, and soils
(Asner et al., 2004; Asner et al., 2005). Selective logging accelerates gap-phase regeneration
within the degraded forests (Huang et al., 2008).</p>
      <p id="d1e294">Over half of all tropical forests have been cleared or logged, and almost
half of standing old-growth tropical forests are designated by national
forest services for timber production (Sist et al., 2015). Disturbances that
result from logging are known to cause forest degradation at the same
magnitude as deforestation each year in terms of both geographic extent and
intensity, with widespread collateral damage to remaining trees, vegetation,
and soils, leading to disturbance to water, energy, and carbon cycling, as
well as ecosystem integrity (Keller et al., 2004b; Asner et al., 2004; Huang and Asner, 2010).</p>
      <p id="d1e297">In most Earth system models (ESMs) that couple terrestrial and atmospheric
processes to investigate global change (e.g., the Community Earth System
Model or the Energy Exascale Earth System Model), selective logging is
typically represented as simple fractions of affected area or an amount of
carbon to be removed on a coarse grid (e.g., 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). One exception is
the representation of wood harvest in the LM3V land model that explicitly
accounts for postdisturbance land age distribution, as part of the
Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) Earth system model
(Shevliakova et al., 2009). In the ESMs, grid cell fractional areas are typically based
on timber production rates estimated from sawmill, sales, and export
statistics (Hurtt et al., 2011; Lawrence et al., 2012). This approach, while practical, does not
effectively differentiate selective logging that retains forest cover from
deforestation.</p>
      <p id="d1e309">The realistic representation of wood harvest was absent in most ESMs because
the models generally did not represent the demographic structure of forests
(tree size and stem number distributions; Bonan, 2008). But progress over the
past two decades in ecological theory and observations (Bustamante et al., 2016; Strigul et al., 2008; Hurtt et al., 1998; Moorcroft et al., 2001) has made it feasible to include vegetation
demography more directly into Earth system models through individual to
cohort-based vegetation in land models (Sato et al., 2007; Watanabe et al., 2011; Smith et al., 2001; Smith et al., 2014; Weng et al., 2015; Baidya Roy et al., 2003; Hurtt et al., 1998; Fisher et al., 2015). These vegetation demography
modules are relatively new in land models, so efforts are still underway to
improve their parameterizations of resource competition for light, water, nutrients, recruitment, mortality, and disturbance including both
natural and anthropogenic components (Fisher et al., 2017).</p>
      <p id="d1e313">In this study, we aim to (1) describe the development of a selective logging
module implemented into The Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem
Simulator (FATES), for simulating anthropogenic disturbances of various
intensities to forest ecosystems and their short-term and long-term effects
on water, energy, carbon cycling, and ecosystem dynamics; (2) assess the
capability of FATES in simulating site-level water, energy, and carbon
budgets, as well as forest structure and composition; (3) benchmark the
simulated variables against available observations at the Tapajós
National Forest in the Amazon, thus identifying potential directions for
model improvement; and (4) assess the simulated recovery trajectory of
tropical forest following disturbance under various logging scenarios. In
Sect. 2, we provide a brief summary of FATES, introduce the new selective
logging module, and describe numerical experiments performed at two sites
with data from field surveys and flux towers. In Sect. 3, FATES-simulated
water, energy, and carbon fluxes and stocks in intact and disturbed forests
are compared to available observations, and the effects of logging practice
and intensity on simulated forest recovery trajectory in terms of carbon
budget, size structure, and composition in plant functional types are
assessed. Conclusions and future work are discussed in Sect. 4.</p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page5001?><sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Model description and study site</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>The Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator</title>
      <p id="d1e331">The Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES) has been
developed as a numerical terrestrial ecosystem model based on the ecosystem
demography representation in the community land model (CLM), formerly known
as CLM(ED) (Fisher et al., 2015). FATES is an implementation of the cohort-based
ecosystem demography (ED) concept (Hurtt et al., 1998; Moorcroft et al., 2001) that can be called as a
library from an ESM land surface scheme, currently including the CLM (Oleson et al., 2013)
or Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) land model (ELM)
(<uri>https://climatemodeling.science.energy.gov/projects/energy-exascale-earth-system-model</uri>, last access: 28 June 2020).
In FATES, the landscape is discretized into spatially implicit patches, each of
which represents land areas with a similar age since last disturbance. The discretization of
ecosystems along a disturbance–recovery axis allows the deterministic
simulation of successional dynamics within a typical forest ecosystem.
Within each patch, individuals are grouped into cohorts by plant functional types
(PFTs) and size classes (SCs), so that cohorts can compete for light based
on their heights and canopy positions. Following disturbance, a patch
fission process splits the original patch into undisturbed and disturbed new
patches. A patch fusion mechanism is implemented to merge patches with
similar structures, which helps prevent the number of patches from growing
too big. In addition to the ED concept, FATES also adopted a modified
version of the perfect plasticity approximation (PPA) (Strigul et al., 2008) concept by
splitting growing cohorts between canopy and understory layers as a
continuous function of height designed for increasing the probability of
coexistence (Fisher et al., 2010). An earlier version of FATES, CLM(ED), has been
applied regionally to explore the sensitivity of biome boundaries to plant
trait representation (Fisher et al., 2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e337">In this study, we specified two plant functional types (PFTs) in FATES
corresponding to early successional and late successional plants,
representative of the primary axis of variability in tropical forests
(Reich, 2014). The early successional PFT is light demanding and grows rapidly
under high-light conditions common prior to canopy closure. This PFT has low-density woody tissues, shorter leaf and root lifetimes, and a higher
background mortality compared to the late successional PFT that has dense
woody tissues, longer leaf and root lifetimes, and lower background
mortality (Brokaw, 1985; Whitmore, 1998) and thus can survive under deep shade and grow
slowly under closed canopy.</p>
      <p id="d1e340">The key parameters that differentiate the two PFTs in FATES are listed in
Table 1, including specific leaf area at the canopy top (SLA<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), the
maximum rate of carboxylation at 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cmax</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), specific wood
density, background mortality, leaf and fine root longevity, and leaf <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
ratio. The parameter ranges were selected based on literature for tropical
forests. Specifically, it has been reported that SLA values ranges from
0.007 to 0.039 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> g C<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Wright et al., 2004) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cmax</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ranges between
10.1 and 105.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Domingues et al., 2005). The specific wood
densities were set to be 0.5 and 0.9 g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> , and the background
mortality rates were set to 0.035 and 0.014 yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for early and late
succession PFTs respectively, consistent with those used in the Ecosystem
Demography Model version 2 for Amazon forests (Longo et al., 2019) . For simplicity,
leaf longevity and root longevity were set to be the same for each PFT
(i.e., 0.9 and 2.6 years for early and late successional PFTs) following the
range in Trumbore and Barbosa De Camargo (2009).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e481">FATES parameters that define early and late successional PFTs.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.91}[.91]?><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Parameter names</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Units</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Early</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Late</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">successional</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">successional</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">PFT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">PFT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Specific leaf area</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> g C<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.014</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cmax</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>mol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">50</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Specific wood density</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Leaf longevity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">yr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Background mortality rate</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.035</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.014</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Leaf <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">g C g N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">40</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Root longevity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">yr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e764">Given that both SLA<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cmax</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> span wide ranges and have been
identified as the most sensitive parameters in FATES in a previous study
(Massoud et al., 2019), we performed one-at-a-time sensitivity tests by perturbing them
within the reported ranges. Based on these tests, it is evident that these
parameters not only affect water, energy, and carbon budget simulations, but
also the coexistence of the two PFTs. In the version of FATES used in this
study (Interested readers are referred to the “Code and data availability” section for
details), coexistence of PFTs is not assured for all parameter combinations,
even if they are both within reasonable ranges, on account of competitive
exclusion feedback processes that prevent coexistence in the presence of
large discrepancies in plant growth and reproduction rates (Fisher et al., 2010; Bohn et al., 2011).
In order to demonstrate FATES' capability in simulating water, energy,
carbon budgets, and forest structure and composition in a holistic
way, we chose to report results based on a set of parameter values that
produces reasonable, stable fractions of two PFTs, as reported in Table 1.
Nevertheless, we have included a summary of all sensitivity tests performed
in the Supplement for completeness. The sensitivity tests
demonstrated that, by tuning SLA<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cmax</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the different
PFTs, FATES is not only capable of capturing coexistence of PFTs, but also
capable of reproducing observed water, energy, and carbon cycle fluxes in
the tropics.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e815"><bold>(a)</bold> Landscape components of selective logging; <bold>(b)</bold> location of the
Tapajós National Forest in the Amazon; and <bold>(c)</bold> a typical logging block
showing tree-fall location, skid trail, road, and log deck coverages. Panels
<bold>(b)</bold> and <bold>(c)</bold> are from Asner et al. (2008).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page5002?><sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>The selective logging module</title>
      <p id="d1e848">The new selective logging module in FATES mimics the ecological,
biophysical, and biogeochemical processes following a logging event. The
module (1) specifies the timing and areal extent of a logging event; (2)
calculates the fractions of trees that are damaged by direct felling,
collateral damage, and infrastructure damage and adds these size-specific
plant mortality types to FATES; (3) splits the logged patch into disturbed
and intact new patches; (4) applies the calculated survivorship to cohorts
in the disturbed patch; and (5) transports harvested logs off-site by
reducing site carbon pools and adds remaining necromass to coarse woody
debris and litter pools.</p>
      <p id="d1e851">The logging module structure and parameterization are based on detailed field
and remote sensing studies (Putz et al., 2008; Asner et al., 2004; Pereira et al., 2002; Asner et al., 2005; Feldpausch et al., 2005).
Logging infrastructure including roads, skids, trails, and log decks are
conceptually represented (Fig. 1). The construction of log decks used to
store logs prior to road transport leads to large canopy openings, but their
contribution to landscape-level gap dynamics is small. In contrast, the
canopy gaps caused by tree felling are small, but their coverage is spatially
extensive at the landscape scale. Variations in logging practices
significantly affect the level of disturbance to tropical forests following
logging (Pereira et al., 2002; Macpherson et al., 2012; Dykstra, 2002; Putz et al., 2008). Logging operations in the tropics
are often carried out with little planning and typically use heavy
machinery to access the forests accompanied by construction of excessive
roads and skid trails, leading to unnecessary tree fall and compaction of
the soil. We refer to these typical operations as conventional logging
(CL). In contrast, reduced impact logging (RIL) is a practice with
extensive preharvest planning, where trees are inventoried and mapped out
for the most efficient and cost-effective harvest and seed trees are deliberately left
on-site to facilitate faster recovery. Through planning, the construction of
skid trails and roads, soil compaction, and disturbance can be minimized. Vines connecting trees are cut, and tree-fall directions are
controlled to reduce damages to surrounding trees. Reduced impact logging
results in consistently less disturbance to forests than conventional
logging (Pereira et al., 2002; Putz et al., 2008).</p>
      <p id="d1e854">The FATES logging module was designed to represent a range of logging
practices in field operations at a landscape level. Both CL and RIL can be
represented in FATES<?pagebreak page5003?> by specifying mortality-rate-associated direct
felling, collateral damages, and mechanical damages as follows: once logging
events are activated, we define three types of mortality associated with
logging practices –  direct-felling mortality
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lmort</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">direct</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), collateral mortality
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lmort</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">collateral</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and mechanical mortality
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lmort</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mechanical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The direct-felling mortality
represents the fraction of trees selected for harvesting that are greater than or
equal to a diameter threshold (this threshold is defined by the diameter at
breast height (DBH) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.3 m denoted as DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>); collateral mortality
denotes the fraction of adjacent trees that are killed by felling of the
harvested trees; and the mechanical mortality represents the fraction of
trees killed by construction of log decks, skid trails, and roads for
accessing the harvested trees, as well as storing and transporting logs
off-site (Fig. 1a). In a logging operation, the loggers typically avoid
large trees when they build log decks, skids, and trails by knocking down
relatively small trees as it is not economical to knock down large trees.
Therefore, we implemented another DBH threshold, DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">infra</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, so that only a fraction of trees <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">infra</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (called mechanical damage fraction) are removed for building
infrastructure (Feldpausch et al., 2005).</p>
      <p id="d1e940">To capture the disturbance mechanisms and degree of damage associated with
logging practices at the landscape level, we apply the mortality types
following a workflow designed to correspond to field operations. In FATES,
as illustrated in Fig. 2, individual trees of all plant functional types
(PFTs) in one patch are grouped into cohorts of similar-sized trees, whose
size and population sizes evolve in time through processes of recruitment,
growth, and mortality. For the purpose of reporting and visualizing the
model state, these cohorts are binned into a set of 13 fixed size classes in
terms of the diameter at the breast height (DBH) (i.e., 0–5, 5–10, 10–15, 15–20, 20–30, 30–40, 40–50, 50–60, 60–70, 70–80, 80–90, 90–100, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm). Cohorts are further organized
into canopy and understory layers, which are subject to different light
conditions (Fig. 2a). When logging activities occur, the canopy trees and
a portion of big understory trees lose their crown coverage through direct
felling for harvesting logs, or as a result of collateral and mechanical
damages (Fig. 2b). The fractions of the canopy trees affected by the three
mortality mechanisms are then summed up to specify the areal percentages of
an old (undisturbed) and a new (disturbed) patch caused by logging in the
patch fission process as discussed in Sect. 2.1 (Fig. 2c). After patch
fission, the canopy layer over the disturbed patch is removed, while that
over the undisturbed patch stays untouched (Fig. 2d). In the undisturbed
patch, the survivorship of understory trees is calculated using an
understory death fraction consistent with the default value corresponding to
that used for natural disturbance (i.e., 0.5598). To differentiate logging
from natural disturbance, a slightly elevated, logging-specific understory
death fraction is applied in the disturbed patch instead at the time of the
logging event. Based on data from field surveys over logged forest plots in
the southern Amazon (Feldpausch et al., 2005), the understory death fraction corresponding to
logging is now set to be 0.65 as the default but can be modified via the
FATES parameter file (Fig. 2e). Therefore, the logging operations will
change the forest from the undisturbed state shown in Fig. 2a to a
disturbed state in Fig. 2f in the logging module. It is worth mentioning
that the newly generated patches are tracked according to the age since disturbance and will be
merged with other patches of similar canopy structure following the patch
fusion processes in FATES in later time steps of a simulation, pending the
inclusion of separate land use fractions for managed and unmanaged forest.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e956">The mortality types (direct felling, mechanical, and collateral)
and patch-generating process in the FATES logging module. The white fraction
in panels <bold>(c)</bold>, <bold>(d)</bold>, and <bold>(f)</bold> indicates mortality associated with other disturbances in
FATES. <bold>(a)</bold> Canopy and understory layers in each cohort in FATES; <bold>(b)</bold>
mortality applied at the time of a logging event; <bold>(c)</bold> the patch fission
process following a given logging event; <bold>(d)</bold> canopy removal in the disturbed
patch following the logging event; <bold>(e)</bold> calculation of the understory survivorship
based on the understory death fraction in each patch; <bold>(d)</bold> the final states
of the intact and disturbed patches.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e995">The flow of necromass following logging.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1004">Logging operations affect forest structure and composition as well as also carbon
cycling (Palace et al., 2008) by modifying the live biomass pools and flow of<?pagebreak page5004?> necromass
(Fig. 3). Following a logging event, the logged trunk products from the
harvested trees are transported off-site (as an added carbon pool for
resource management in the model), while their branches enter the coarse
woody debris (CWD) pool, and their leaves and fine roots enter the litter
pool. Similarly, trunks and branches of the dead trees caused by collateral
and mechanical damages also become CWD, while their leaves and fine roots
become litter. Specifically, the densities of dead trees as a result of
direct felling, collateral, and mechanical damages in a cohort are
calculated as follows:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M46" display="block"><mml:mtable class="array" columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">direct</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lmort</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">direct</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">collateral</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lmort</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">collateral</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mechanical</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lmort</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mechanical</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> stands for the area of the patch being logged, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number
of individuals in the cohort where the mortality types apply (i.e., as
specified by the size thresholds, DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">infra</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>). For each cohort, we denote <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">indirect</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">collateral</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mechanical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">total</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">direct</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">indirect</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1174">Leaf litter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Litter</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">leaf</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, kg C) and root litter
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Litter</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">root</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, kg C) at the cohort level are then
calculated as

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M55" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>2</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Litter</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">leaf</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">total</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">leaf</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>3</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Litter</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">root</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">total</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">root</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">store</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">leaf</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">root</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are live biomass in leaves and fine roots, respectively, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">store</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is stored biomass in the labile carbon reserve in all
individual trees in the cohort of interest.</p>
      <p id="d1e1316">Following the existing CWD structure in FATES (Fisher et al., 2015), CWD in the logging
module is first separated into two categories: aboveground CWD and
belowground CWD. Within each category, four size classes are tracked based
on their source, following Thonicke et al. (2010): trunks, large branches,
small branches, and twigs. Aboveground CWD from trunks
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">trunk</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">agb</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, kg C) and
branches and twigs (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">branch</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">agb</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, kg C) are calculated as follows:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M61" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>4</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">trunk</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">agb</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">indirect</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">stem</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">agb</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">trunk</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E5"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>5</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">branch</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">agb</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">total</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">stem</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">agb</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">branch</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">stem</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">agb</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the amount of aboveground
stem biomass in the cohort, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">trunk</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">branch</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
represent the fraction of trunks and branches (e.g., large branches, small branches, and twigs).
Similarly, the belowground CWD from trunks
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">trunk</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">bg</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, kg C) and
branches and twigs (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">branch</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">bg</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, kg C)
are calculated as follows:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M67" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>6</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">trunk</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">bg</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">total</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">root</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">bg</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">trunk</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E7"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>7</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">branch</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">bg</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">total</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">root</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">bg</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">branch</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">croot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (kg C) is the amount of coarse root biomass in
the cohort. Site-level total litter and CWD inputs can then be obtained by
integrating the corresponding pools over all the cohorts in the site. To
ensure mass conservation, the total loss of live biomass due to logging,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (i.e., carbon in leaf, fine roots, storage, and
structural pools), needs to be balanced with increases in litter and CWD
pools and the carbon stored in harvested logs shipped off-site as follows:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><label>8</label><mml:math id="M70" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Litter</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">trunk</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">product</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">litter</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CWD</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the increments
in litter and CWD pools, and trunk_product represents harvested logs shipped off-site.</p>
      <p id="d1e1714">Following the logging event, the forest structure and composition in terms
of cohort distributions, as well as the live biomass and necromass pools, are
updated. Following this logging event update to forest structure, the native
processes simulating physiology, growth, and competition for resources in and
between cohorts resume. Since the canopy layer is removed in the disturbed
patch, the existing understory trees are promoted to the canopy layer, but,
in general, the canopy is incompletely filled in by these newly promoted
trees, and thus the canopy does not fully close. Therefore, more light can
penetrate and reach the understory layer in the disturbed patch, leading to
increases in light-demanding species in the early stage of regeneration,
followed by a succession process in which shade-tolerant species dominate
gradually.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1720">Distributions of stem density (N ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), basal area (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and aboveground biomass (Kg C m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) before and after logging
at km83, separated by diameter of breast height (normal text) and aggregated
across all sizes (bold text).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Time</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">Before logging </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col7" align="center">After logging </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Variables</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Early</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Late</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>Total</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Early</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Late</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>Total</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><bold>Stem density (</bold><bold>N ha</bold><inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="bold">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula><bold>)</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>264</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>195</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>459</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>260</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>191</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>443</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Stem density (10–30 cm, N ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">230</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">169</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>399</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">229</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">167</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>396</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Stem density (30–50 cm, N ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>30</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>29</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Stem density (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm, N ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>30</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>18</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><bold>Basal area (</bold><bold>m</bold><inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="bold">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><bold> ha</bold><inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="bold">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula><bold>)</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>11.6</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>9.2</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>21.0</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>10.3</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>8.3</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>18.5</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Basal area (10–30 cm m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>4.2</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>3.8</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Basal area (30–50 cm m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>4.2</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>3.9</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Basal area (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>12.6</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>10.8</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><bold>AGB (Kg C m</bold><inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="bold">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula><bold>)</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><bold>7.6</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><bold>8.9</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>16.5</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><bold>6.8</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><bold>7.9</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>14.7</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">AGB (10–30 cm kg C m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>3.8</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>3.8</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">AGB (30–50 cm kg C m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>2.3</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>2.2</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">AGB (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm kg C m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><bold>10.4</bold></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><bold>8.7</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e1768">Data in this table obtained based on inventory during the LBA period (Menton et al., 2011; de Sousa et al., 2011).</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Study site and data</title>
      <p id="d1e2415">In this study, we used data from two evergreen tropical forest sites located
in the Tapajós National Forest, Brazil (Fig. 1b). These sites
were established during the Large-Scale Biosphere-Atmosphere Experiment in
Amazonia (LBA) and are selected because of data availability including
those from forest plot surveys and two flux towers established during the
LBA period (Keller et al., 2004a). These sites were named after distances along the
BR-163 highway from Santarém: km67 (2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>51<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, 54<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>58<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W) and km83 (3<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>3<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, 54<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>56<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W). They are situated on
a flat plateau and were established as a control-treatment pair for a
selective logging experiment. Tree felling operations were initiated at km83
in September 2001 for a period of about 2 months. Both sites are similar
with a mean annual precipitation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm and mean annual
temperature of 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, on nutrient-poor clay Oxisols with low
organic content (Silver et al., 2000).</p>
      <?pagebreak page5005?><p id="d1e2510">Prior to logging, both sites were old-growth forests with limited previous
human disturbances caused by hunting, gathering Brazil nuts, and similar
activities. A comprehensive set of meteorological variables, as well as
land–atmosphere exchanges of water, energy, and carbon fluxes, have been
measured by an eddy covariance tower at an hourly time step over the period
of 2002 to 2011, including precipitation, air temperature, surface pressure,
relative humidity, incoming shortwave and longwave radiation, latent and
sensible heat fluxes, and net ecosystem exchange (NEE) (Hayek et al., 2018).
Another flux tower was established at km83, the logged site, with hourly
meteorological and eddy covariance measurements in the period of 2000–2003
(Miller et al., 2004; Goulden et al., 2004; Saleska et al., 2003). The towers are listed as BR-Sa1 and BR-Sa3 in the
AmeriFlux network (<uri>https://ameriflux.lbl.gov</uri>, last access: 28 June 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e2516">These tower- and biometric-based observations were summarized to quantify
logging-induced perturbations on old-growth Amazonian forests in Miller et al. (2011) and
are used in this study to benchmark the model-simulated carbon budget. Over
the period of 1999 to 2001, all trees <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm in DBH in 20 ha of forest
in four 1 km long transects within the km67 footprint were inventoried, as
well as trees <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm in DBH on subplots with an area of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ha. At km83, inventory surveys on trees <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">55</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm in
DBH were conducted in 1984 and 2000, and another survey on trees
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm in DBH was conducted in 2000 (Miller et al., 2004). Estimates of
aboveground biomass (AGB) were then derived using allometric equations for
Amazon forests (Rice et al., 2004; Chambers et al., 2004; Keller et al., 2001). Necromass (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm diameter) production was also measured approximately every 6 months in a
4.5-year period from November 2001 through February 2006 in a logged and
undisturbed forest at km83 (Palace et al., 2008). Field measurements of ground
disturbance in terms of number of felled trees, as well as areas disturbed by
collateral and mechanical damages were also conducted at a similar site in
Pará state along multitemporal sequences of postharvest regrowth of
0.5–3.5 years (Asner et al., 2004; Pereira et al., 2002).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e2584">Cohort-level fractional damage fractions in different logging
scenarios.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Scenarios</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Conventional logging </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center">Reduced impact logging </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">High</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Low</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">High (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">83</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Low (km83)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Experiments</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Direct-felling fraction (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">DBH</mml:mi><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">DBH</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.12</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Collateral damage fraction (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">DBH</mml:mi><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">DBH</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.036</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.018</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.024</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.012</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mechanical damage fraction (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">DBH</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">infra</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.113</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.073</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.033</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.024</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Understory death fraction<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.65</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e2587"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">infra</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Applied to the new patch generated by direct felling and collateral
damage.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2912">Table 2 provides a summary of stem density and basal area distribution
across size classes at km83 based on the biomass survey data (Menton et al., 2011; de Sousa et al., 2011). To facilitate comparisons with simulations from FATES, we divided the
inventory into early and late succession PFTs using a threshold of 0.7 g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for specific wood density, consistent with the definition of these
PFTs in Table 1. As shown in Table 2, prior to the logging event in year
2000, this forest was composed of 399, 30, and 30 trees per hectare in size
classes of 10–30, 30–50, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm respectively; following
logging, the numbers were reduced to 396, 29, and 18 trees per hectare,
losing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % of trees <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm in size. The changes in
stem density (SD) were caused by different mechanisms for different size
classes. The reduction in stem density of 2 ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm
size class was caused by timber harvest directly, while the reductions of 3 and 1 ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the 10–30 and 30–50 cm size classes were
caused by collateral and mechanical damages. Corresponding to the loss of
trees in logging operations, the basal area (BA) decreased from 3.9, 4.0, and
12.9 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> to 3.8, 3.9, and 10.8 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and aboveground biomass (AGB) decreased from 3.8, 2.3, and 10.4 kg C m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> to 3.8,
2.2, and 8.7 kg C m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the 10–30, 30–50, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm size
class, respectively.</p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page5006?><sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Numerical experiments</title>
      <p id="d1e3077">In this study, the gap-filled meteorological forcing data for the Tapajós
National Forest processed by Longo et al. (2019) are used to drive the CLM(FATES) model.
Characteristics of the sites, including soil texture, vegetation cover
fraction, and canopy height, were obtained from the LBA-Data Model
Intercomparison Project (de Gonçalves et al., 2013). Specifically, soil at km67 contains
90 % clay and 2 % sand, while soil at km83 contains 80 % clay and
18 % sand. Both sites are covered by tropical evergreen forest at
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">98</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % within their footprints, with the remaining 2 %
assumed to be covered by bare soil. As discussed in Longo et al. (2018), who deployed
the Ecosystem Demography Model version 2 at this site, soil texture and
hence soil hydraulic parameters are highly variable even with the footprint
of the same eddy covariance tower, and they could have significant impacts on not
only water and energy simulations, but also simulated forest composition and
carbon stocks and fluxes. Further, generic pedotransfer functions designed
to capture temperate soils typically perform poorly in clay-rich Amazonian
soils (Fisher et al., 2008; Tomasella and Hodnett, 1998). Because we focus on introducing the FATES logging,
we leave for forthcoming studies the exploration of the sensitivity of the
simulations to soil texture and other critical environmental factors.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e3093">Comparison of energy fluxes (mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> standard deviation)
between eddy covariance tower measurements and FATES simulations.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.91}[.91]?><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="center"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Variables</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">LH (W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">SH (W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Rn (W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Observed (km83)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">101.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">129.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulated (Intact)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">87.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">112.8</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulated (RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">87.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">112.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulated (RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">87.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39.8</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">112.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulated (CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">87.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">112.8</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulated (CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">86.8</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">112.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e3483">CLM(FATES) was initialized using soil texture at km83 (i.e., 80 % clay and
18 % sand) from bare ground and spun up for 800 years until the carbon
pools and forest structure (i.e., size distribution) and composition of PFTs
reached equilibrium, by recycling the meteorological forcing at km67
(2001–2011) as the sites are close enough. The final states from spin-up
were saved as the initial condition for follow-up simulations. An intact
experiment was conducted by running the model over a period of 2001 to 2100
without logging by recycling the 2001–2011 forcing using the parameter set
in Table 1. The atmospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration was assumed to be a
constant of 367 ppm over the entire simulation period, consistent with the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> levels during the logging treatment (Dlugokencky et al., 2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e3509">We specified an experimental logging event in FATES on 1 September 2001
(Table 3). It was reported by Figueira et al. (2008) that, following the reduced-impact-logging event in September 2001, 9 % of the trees greater than or equal to
DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm were harvested, with an associated collateral damage
fraction of 0.009 for trees <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. DBH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">infra</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is set to be 30 cm, so that only a fraction of trees <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm
are removed for building infrastructure (Feldpausch et al., 2005). This experiment is
denoted as the RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> experiment in Table 2 and is the one that matches
the actual logging practice at km83.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e3577">Simulated energy budget terms and leaf area indices in intact and
logged forests compared to observations from km67 (left) and km83 (right)
(Miller et al., 2011). The dashed vertical line indicates the timing of the logging
event. The shaded areas in panels <bold>(a)</bold>–<bold>(f)</bold> are uncertainty estimates based on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-filter cutoff analyses in Miller et al. (2011).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3602">We recognize that the harvest intensity in September 2001 at km83 was
extremely low. Therefore, in order to study the impacts of different logging
practices and harvest intensities, three additional logging experiments were
conducted as listed in Table 3: conventional logging with high intensity
(CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), conventional logging with low intensity (CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), and
reduced impact logging with high intensity (RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>). The high-intensity logging doubled the direct-felling fraction in RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and
CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, as shown in the RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> experiments.
Compared to the RIL experiments, the CL experiments feature elevated
collateral and mechanical damages as one would observe in such operations.
All logging experiments were initialized from the spun-up state using site
characteristics at km83 previously discussed and were conducted over the
period of 2001–2100 by recycling meteorological forcing from 2001 to 2011.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page5008?><sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results and discussions</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Simulated energy and water fluxes</title>
      <p id="d1e3685">Simulated monthly mean energy and water fluxes at the two sites are shown
and compared to available observations in Fig. 4. The performances of the
simulations closest to site conditions were compared to observations and
summarized in Table 4 (i.e., intact for km67 and RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> for km83). The
observed fluxes as well as their uncertainty ranges noted as Obs67 and Obs83
from the towers were obtained from Saleska et al. (2013), consistent with those in Miller et al. (2011). As shown in Table 4, the simulated mean (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> standard deviation)
latent heat (LH), sensible heat (SH), and net radiation (Rn) fluxes at km83
in RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> over the period of 2001–2003 are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90.2</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">112.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, compared to tower-based
observations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">101.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">129.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Therefore, the simulated and observed Bowen ratios are 0.35 and
0.20 at km83, respectively. This result suggests that, at an annual time
step, the observed partitioning between LH and SH is reasonable, while the
net radiation simulated by the model can be improved. At seasonal scales,
even though net radiation is captured by CLM(FATES), the model does not
adequately partition sensible and latent heat fluxes. This is particularly
true for sensible heat fluxes as the model simulates large seasonal
variabilities in SH when compared to observations at the site (i.e.,
standard deviations of monthly mean simulated SH are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, while observations are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). As
illustrated in Fig. 4c and d, the model significantly overestimates
SH in the dry season (June–December), while it slightly underestimates SH in
the wet season. It is worth mentioning that incomplete closure of
the energy budget is common at eddy covariance towers (Wilson et al., 2002; Foken, 2008) and
has been reported to be <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % at the two sites (Saleska et al., 2003).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e3867">Simulated <bold>(a)</bold> aboveground biomass and <bold>(b)</bold> coarse woody debris in
intact and logged forests in a 1-year period before or after the logging
event in the four logging scenarios listed in Table 3. The observations
(Obs<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">intact</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and Obs<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">logged</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) were derived from inventory (Menton et al., 2011; de Sousa et al., 2011).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3900">Figure 4j shows the comparison between simulated and observed (Goulden et al., 2010)
volumetric soil moisture content (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) at the top 10 cm. This
comparison reveals another model structural deficiency; that is, even though
the model simulates higher soil moisture contents compared to observations
(a feature generally attributable to the soil moisture retention curve), the
transpiration beta factor, the down-regulating factor of transpiration from
plants, fluctuates significantly over a wide range and can be as low as 0.3
in the dry season. In reality flux towers in the Amazon generally do not
show severe moisture limitations in the dry season (Fisher et al., 2007). The lack of
limitation is typically attributed to the plant's ability to extract soil
moisture from deep soil layers, a phenomenon that is difficult to simulate
using a classical beta function (Baker et al., 2008), and potentially is reconcilable
using hydrodynamic representation of plant water uptake (Powell et al., 2013; Christoffersen et al., 2016) as in the final stages of incorporation into the FATES model.
Consequently, the model simulates consistently low ET during dry seasons
(Fig. 4e and f), while observations indicate that canopies are
highly productive owing to adequate water supply to support transpiration
and photosynthesis, which could further stimulate coordinated leaf growth
with senescence during the dry season (Wu et al., 2016, 2017).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e3927">Simulated carbon fluxes in intact and logged forests compared to
observed fluxes from km67 (left) and km83 (right). The dashed black vertical
line indicates the timing of the logging event, while the dashed red
horizontal line indicates estimated fluxes derived based on eddy covariance
measurements and inventory (Miller et al., 2011). The shaded areas in panels <bold>(a)</bold>–<bold>(f)</bold> are
uncertainty estimates based on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-filter cutoff analyses in Miller et al. (2011). Panels <bold>(g)</bold>–<bold>(i)</bold> show comparisons between annual fluxes as only annual
estimates of these fluxes are available from Miller et al. (2011).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e3960">Trajectories of carbon pools in intact (left) and logged (right)
forests. The dashed black vertical line indicates the timing of the logging
event. The dashed red horizontal line indicates observed prelogging (left) and
postlogging (right) inventories respectively (Menton et al., 2011; de Sousa et al., 2011).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Carbon budget as well as forest structure and composition in the intact forest</title>
      <p id="d1e3977">Figures 5–7 show simulated carbon pools and fluxes, which are
tabulated in Table 5 as well. As shown in Fig. 5, prior to logging, the
simulated aboveground biomass and necromass (CWD <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> litter) are 174 and 50 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, compared to 165 and 58.4 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> based on permanent plot measurements. The simulated carbon
pools are generally lower than observations reported in Miller et al. (2011) but are
within reasonable ranges, as errors associated with these estimates could be
as high as 50 % due to issues related to sampling and allometric
equations, as discussed in Keller et al. (2001). The lower biomass estimates are
consistent with the finding of excessive soil moisture stress during the dry
season and low leaf area index (LAI) in the model.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Table 5</label><caption><p id="d1e4014">Comparison of carbon budget terms between observation-based
estimates<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and simulations at km83.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.93}[.93]?><oasis:tgroup cols="12">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Variable</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Obs. </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col12" align="center">Simulated </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Prelogging</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3 years postlogging</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Intact</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Disturb level</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0 yr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1 yr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3 yr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">15 yr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30 yr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">50 yr</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">70 yr</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">AGB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">165</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">147</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">174</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">156</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">157</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">159</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">163</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">167</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">169</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">173</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">137</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">138</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">142</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">152</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">158</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">163</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">168</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">154</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">155</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">157</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">163</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">167</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">168</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">164</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">134</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">135</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">139</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">150</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">156</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">163</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">162</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Necromass</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">58.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">74.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">58</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">51</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">51</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">54</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">101</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">54</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NEE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.23</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">3.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.33</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.47</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.39</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.37</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.55</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.23</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">GPP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">32.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">32.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">30.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">30.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">29.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">30.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">30.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">30.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">29.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">29.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">28.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">30.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">30.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">30.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">30.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">29.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">29.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">30.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">30.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">29.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">30.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">29.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">27.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">29.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">30.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">30.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">30.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NPP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">13.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">13.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">14.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">13.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">13.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">13.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">13.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">13.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">13.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">13.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">13.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">13.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">13.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">13.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">13.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">13.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">13.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">13.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">13.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">13.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">13.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">13.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">13.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">13.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">13.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">ER</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">31.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">31.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">29.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?><?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?><?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>29.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">31.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">32.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">29.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">29.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">29.8</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">29.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">32.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">33.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">29.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">29.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">29.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">29.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">31.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">32.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">29.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">29.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">30.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">29.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">32.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">33.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">29.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">29.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">30.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HR</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">10.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">12.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">15.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">13.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">13.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">13.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">17.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">17.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">12.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">13.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">13.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">12.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">16.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">13.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">13.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">13.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">13.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">17.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">17.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">12.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">13.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">12.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">13.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">AR</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">23.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">16.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">16.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">16.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">16.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">16.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">16.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">16.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">16.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">16.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">16.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">16.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">16.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">16.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">16.8</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">16.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">16.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">16.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">16.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">16.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">16.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">14.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">15.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">16.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">16.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">17.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">16.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e4026"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Source of observation-based estimates: Miller et
al. (2011). Uncertainty in carbon fluxes (GPP, ER, NEE) are based on
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-filter cutoff analyses described in the same paper.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <?pagebreak page5010?><p id="d1e5968">Combining forest inventory and eddy covariance measurements, Miller et al. (2011) also
provides estimates for net ecosystem exchange (NEE), gross primary
production (GPP), net primary production (NPP), ecosystem respiration (ER),
heterotrophic respiration (HR), and autotrophic respiration (AR). As shown
in Table 5, the model simulates reasonable values in GPP (30.4 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and ER (29.7 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), when compared
to values estimated from the observations (32.6 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for
GPP and 31.9 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for ER) in the intact forest. However,
the model appears to overestimate NPP (13.5 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> as
compared to the observation-based estimate of 9.5 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
and HR (12.8 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> as compared to the estimated value
of 8.9 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), while it underestimates AR (16.8 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> as compared to the observation-based estimate of 23.1 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that we
selected the specific parameter set to illustrate the capability of the
model in capturing species composition and size structure, while the
performance in capturing carbon balance is slightly compromised given the
limited number of sensitivity tests performed.</p>
      <p id="d1e6215">Consistent with the carbon budget terms, Table 5 lists the simulated and
observed values of stem density (ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) in different size classes in
terms of DBH. The model simulates 471 trees per hectare with DBHs greater
than or equal to 10 cm in the intact forest, compared to 459 trees per
hectare from the observed inventory. In terms of distribution across the DBH
classes of 10–30, 30–50, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>50 cm, 339, 73, and 59 N ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
of trees were simulated, while 399, 30, and 30 N ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were observed in
the intact forest. In general, this version of FATES is able to reproduce
the size structure and tree density in the tropics reasonably well. In
addition to<?pagebreak page5011?> size distribution, by parametrizing early and late successional
PFTs (Table 1), FATES is capable of simulating the coexistence of the two
PFTs and therefore the PFT-specific trajectories of stem density, basal area,
canopy, and understory mortality rates. We will discuss these in Sect. 3.4.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Effects of logging on water, energy, and carbon budgets</title>
      <p id="d1e6269">The response of energy and water budgets to different levels of logging
disturbances is illustrated in Table 4 and Fig. 4. Following the logging
event, the LAI is reduced proportionally to the logging intensities (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for RL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, RL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> respectively in September 2001; see Fig. 4h). The leaf area index
recovers within 3 years to its prelogging level or even to slightly
higher levels as a result of the improved light environment following
logging leading to changes in forest structure and composition (to be
discussed in Sect. 3.4). In response to the changes in stem density and
LAI, discernible differences are found in all energy budget terms. For
example, less leaf area leads to reductions in LH (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) and increases in SH (0.6 %, 1.0 %, 0.8 %, and
2.0 %) proportional to the damage levels (i.e., RL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, RL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the first 3 years following the logging
event when compared to the control simulation. Energy budget responses scale
with the level of damage, so that the biggest differences are detected in
the CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> scenario, followed by RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. The difference in simulated water and energy fluxes between the
RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (i.e., the scenario that is the closest to the experimental
logging event) and<?pagebreak page5012?> intact cases is the smallest, as the level of damage is
the lowest among all scenarios.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e6474">Changes in total stem densities and the fractions of the early
successional PFT in different size classes following a single logging event
on 1 September 2001 at km83. The dashed black vertical line indicates the
timing of the logging event, while the solid red line and the dashed cyan
horizontal line indicate observed prelogging and postlogging inventories
respectively (Menton et al., 2011; de Sousa et al., 2011).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e6483">As with LAI, the water and energy fluxes recover rapidly in 3–4 years
following logging. Miller et al. (2011) compared observed sensible and latent heat
fluxes between the control (km67) and logged sites (km83). They found that,
in the first 3 years following logging, the between-site difference
(i.e., logged–control) in LH reduced from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and that in SH increased from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. When normalized by observed fluxes during the same
periods at km83, these changes correspond to a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % reduction in LH and a
7 % increase in SH, compared to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and 4 % differences in LH
and SH between RL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and the control simulations. In general, both
observations and our modeling results suggest that the impacts of reduced
impact logging on energy fluxes are modest and that the energy and water
fluxes can quickly recover to their prelogging conditions at the site.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e6585">Changes in basal area of the two PFTs in different size classes
following a single logging event on 1 September 2001 at km83. The dashed black vertical line indicates the timing of the logging event, while the
solid red line and the dashed cyan horizontal line indicate observed prelogging
and postlogging inventories respectively (Menton et al., 2011; de Sousa et al., 2011). Note that for
the size class 0–10 cm, observations are not available from the inventory.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e6594">Figures 6 and 7 show the impact of logging on carbon fluxes and pools at a
monthly time step, and the corresponding annual fluxes and changes in carbon
pools are summarized in Table 5. The logging disturbance leads to reductions
in GPP, NPP, AR, and AGB, as well as increases in ER, NEE, HR, and CWD. The impacts
of logging on the carbon budgets are also proportional to logging damage
levels. Specifically, logging reduces the simulated AGB from 174 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (intact) to 156 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), 137 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), 154 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), and 134 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, while it increases the simulated necromass pool (CWD <inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> litter) from 50.0 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the intact case to 73 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), 97 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), 76 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), and 101 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>). For the case closest to the experimental logging event
(RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), the changes in AGB and necromass from the intact case are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (10 %) and 23.0 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (46 %), in comparison to
observed changes of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in AGB (12 %) and 16 Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(27 %) in necromass from Miller et al. (2011), respectively. The magnitudes and
directions of these changes are reasonable when compared to observations
(i.e., decreases in GPP, ER, and AR following logging). On the other hand,
the simulations indicate that the forest could be turned from a carbon sink
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.69</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) to a larger carbon source in 1–5 years
following logging, consistent with observations from the tower suggesting
that the forest was a carbon sink or a modest carbon source (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Mg C ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) prior to logging.</p>
      <p id="d1e6953">The recovery trajectories following logging are also shown in Figs. 6, 7,
and Table 5. It takes more than 70 years for AGB to return to its
prelogging levels, but the recovery of carbon fluxes such as GPP, NPP, and
AR is much faster (i.e., within 5 years following logging). The initial
recovery rates of AGB following logging are faster for high-intensity
logging because of increased light reaching the forest floor, as indicated by
the steeper slopes corresponding to the CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
scenarios compared to those of CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 9h). This
finding is consistent with previous observational and modeling studies
(Mazzei et al., 2010; Huang and Asner, 2010) in that the damage level determines the number of years
required to recover the original AGB, and the AGB accumulation rates in
recently logged forests are higher than those in intact forests. For example,
by synthesizing data from 79 permanent plots at 10 sites across the Amazon
basin, Ruttishauser et al. (2016) and Piponiot et al. (2018) show that it requires 12, 43, and 75 years for
the forest to recover with initial losses of 10 %, 25 %, or 50 % in AGB.
Corresponding to the changes in AGB, logging introduces a large amount of
necromass to the forest floor, with the highest increases in the CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
and RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> scenarios. As shown in Fig. 7d and Table 5, necromass
and CWD pools return to the prelogging level in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> years.
Meanwhile, HR in RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> stays elevated in the 5 years following logging
but converges to that from the intact simulation in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> years, which is consistent with observations (Miller et al., 2011; Table 5).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e7042">Changes in mortality (5-year running average) of the <bold>(a)</bold> early and
<bold>(b)</bold> late successional trees in different size classes following a single
logging event on 1 September 2001. The dashed black vertical line indicates
the timing of the logging event.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e7059">Changes in mortality (5-year running average) of the <bold>(a)</bold> canopy and
<bold>(b)</bold> understory trees in different size classes following a single logging
event on 1 September 2001. The dashed black vertical line indicates the
timing of the logging event.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/17/4999/2020/bg-17-4999-2020-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Table 6</label><caption><p id="d1e7078">The simulated stem density (N ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) distribution at km83.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Years following logging</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Disturbance level</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col6" align="center">Size classes (DBH, cm) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10–30 cm</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">30–50 cm</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Prelogging</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Intact</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">21 799</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">339</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">59</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">0 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19 101 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>17 628 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>18 031 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>15 996</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">316 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>306 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>299 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>280</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">68 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>65 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>66 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">49 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>41 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>49 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>41</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1 year</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22 518 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>22 450 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>23 673 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>23 505</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">316 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>306 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>303 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>279</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">67 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>66 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>66 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">54 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>46 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>54 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>46</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">3 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">23 699 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>25 960 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>25 048 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>28 323</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">364 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>368 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>346 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>337</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">68 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>66 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>68 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">50 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>43 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>51 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>43</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">15 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">21 105 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>20 618 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>22 886 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>22 975</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">389 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>389 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>323 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>348</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">63 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>67 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>61 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">56 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>53 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>57 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>55</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">30 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22 979 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>21 332 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>23 140 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>23 273</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">291 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>288 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>317 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>351</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">82 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>87 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>66 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">62 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>59 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>66 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>53</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">50 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22 119 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>23 369 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>24 806 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>26 205</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">258 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>335 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>213 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>320</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">84 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>61 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>60 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">62 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>66 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>76 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>58</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">70 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20 594 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>22 143 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>19 705 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>19 784</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">356 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>326 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>326 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>337</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">58 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>63 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>55 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">64 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>61 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>63 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>62</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Table 7</label><caption><p id="d1e7809">The simulated basal area (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) distribution at km83.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="2cm" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="justify" colwidth="2cm"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Years following logging</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Disturbance level</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col6" align="center">Size classes (DBH, cm) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10–30 cm <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">30–50 cm <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Prelogging</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Intact</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">8.1 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8.5 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">44.0 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">0 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.1 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.0 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>2.9 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>2.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">8.0 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.7 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.6 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.0 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.1 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">38.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>31.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>37.9 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>31.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1 year</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.1 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.7 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.5 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>6.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">7.7 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.6 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.6 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">38.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>32.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>38.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>32.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">3 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">8.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.5 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.0 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">38.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>32.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>38.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>32.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">15 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.1 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>9.5 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.9 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>9.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">7.6 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.1 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">40.1 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>35.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>40.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>35.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">30 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.0 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.7 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>8.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.0 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>9.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.7 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">42.0 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>37.9 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>42.5 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>38.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">50 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.6 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.6 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>5.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.1 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.0 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>6.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>9.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">42.9 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>41.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>45.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>38.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">70 years</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>3.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">8.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.9 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.6 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">7.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>5.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>7.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">44.9 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>42.7 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>42.8 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>41.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Effects of logging on forest structure and composition</title>
      <p id="d1e8561">The capability of the CLM(FATES) model to simulate vegetation demographics,
forest structure, and composition while simulating the water, energy, and
carbon budgets simultaneously (Fisher et al., 2017) allows for the interrogation of
the modeled impacts of alternative logging practices on the forest size
structure. Table 6 shows the forest structure in terms of stem density
distribution across size classes from the simulations compared to
observations from the site, while Figs. 8 and 9 further break it down into
early and late succession PFTs and size classes in terms of stem density and
basal areas. As discussed in Sect. 2.2 and summarized in Table 3, the
logging practices, reduced impact logging and conventional logging, differ
in terms of preharvest planning and actual field operation to minimize
collateral and mechanical damages, while the logging intensities (i.e., high
and low) indicate the target direct-felling fractions. The corresponding
outcomes of changes in forest structure in comparison to the intact forest,
as simulated by FATES, are summarized in Tables 6 and 7. The conventional-logging scenarios (i.e., CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) feature more
losses in small trees less than 30 cm in DBH, when compared to the smaller
reduction in stem density in size classes less than 30 cm in DBH in the
reduced-impact-logging scenarios (i.e., RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>).
Scenarios with different logging intensities (i.e., high and low) result in
different direct-felling intensity. That is, the numbers of surviving large
trees (DBH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30 cm) in RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are 117 ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
and 115 ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, but those in RIL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are 106 and 103 ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e8681">In response to the improved light environment after the removal of large trees,
early successional trees quickly establish and populate the tree-fall gaps
following logging in 2–3 years as shown in Fig. 8a. Stem density in the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm size classes is proportional to the damage levels (i.e.,
ranked as CL<inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RIL</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">high</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CL</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RIL</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">low</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), followed by a<?pagebreak page5013?> transition to late successional
trees in later years when the canopy is closed again (Fig. 8b). Such a
successional process is also evident in Fig. 9a and b in terms of
basal areas. The number of early successional trees in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm
size classes then slowly declines afterwards but is sustained throughout the
simulation as a result of natural disturbances. Such a shift in the plant
community towards light-demanding species following disturbances is
consistent with observations reported in the literature (Baraloto et al., 2012; Both et al., 2018).
Following regeneration in logging gaps, a fraction of trees win the
competition within the 0–10 cm size classes and are promoted to the 10–30 cm size classes in about 10 years following the disturbances (Figs. 8d and
9d). Then a fraction of those trees subsequently enter the 30–50 cm size
classes in 20–40 years following the disturbance (Figs. 8f and 9f) and so
on through larger size classes afterwards (Figs. 8h and 9h). We note that,
despite the goal of achieving a deterministic and smooth averaging across
discrete stochastic disturbance events using the ecosystem demography
approach (Moorcroft et al., 2001) in FATES, the successional process described above, as
well as the total numbers of stems in each size bin, shows evidence of
episodic and discrete waves of population change. These arise due to the
required discretization of the continuous time-since-disturbance
heterogeneity into patches, combined with the current maximum cap on the
number of patches in FATES (10 per site).</p>
      <p id="d1e8735">As discussed in Sect. 2.4, the early successional trees have a high
mortality (Fig. 10a, c, e, and g) compared to the mortality (Fig. 10b, d, f, and h) of
late successional trees as expected given their higher background mortality
rate. Their mortality also fluctuates at an equilibrium level because of the
periodic gap dynamics due to natural disturbances, while the mortality of
late successional trees remains stable. The mortality rates of canopy trees
(Fig. 11a, c, e, and g) remain low and stable over the years for all size
classes, indicating that canopy trees are not light-limited or
water-stressed. In comparison, the mortality rate of small understory<?pagebreak page5014?> trees
(Fig. 11b) shows a declining trend following logging, consistent with the
decline in mortality of the small early successional tree (Fig. 10a). As
the understory trees are promoted to larger size classes (Fig. 11d, f),
their mortality rates stay high. It is evident that it is hard for the
understory trees to be promoted to the largest size class (Fig. 11h);
therefore the mortality cannot be calculated due to the lack of population.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Conclusion and discussions</title>
      <p id="d1e8748">In this study, we developed a selective logging module in FATES and
parameterized the model to simulate different logging practices
(conventional and reduced impact) with various intensities. This newly
developed selective logging module is capable of mimicking the ecological,
biophysical, and biogeochemical processes at a landscape level following a
logging event in a lumped way by (1) specifying the timing and areal extent
of a logging event; (2) calculating the fractions of trees that are damaged
by direct felling, collateral damage, and infrastructure damage and adding
these size-specific plant mortality types to FATES; (3) splitting the
logged patch into disturbed and intact new patches; (4) applying the
calculated survivorship to cohorts in the disturbed patch; and (5)
transporting harvested logs off-site and adding the remaining necromass from
damaged trees into coarse woody debris and litter pools.</p>
      <p id="d1e8751">We then applied FATES coupled to CLM to the Tapajós National Forest by
conducting numerical experiments driven by observed meteorological forcing,
and we benchmarked the simulations against long-term ecological and eddy
covariance measurements. We demonstrated that the model is capable of
simulating site-level water, energy, and carbon budgets, as well as forest
structure and composition holistically, with responses consistent with those
documented in the existing literature as follows:
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e8756">The model captures perturbations on energy and water budget terms in
response to different levels of logging disturbances. Our modeling results
suggest that logging leads to reductions in canopy interception, canopy
evaporation and transpiration, and elevated soil temperature and soil
heat fluxes in magnitudes proportional to the damage levels.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e8760">The logging disturbance leads to reductions in GPP, NPP, AR, and AGB, as well as increases in ER, NEE, HR, and CWD. The initial impacts of logging on the
carbon budget are also proportional to damage levels as results of different
logging practices.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e8764">Following the logging event, simulated carbon fluxes such as GPP, NPP, and
AR recover within 5 years, but it takes decades for AGB to return to its
prelogging levels. Consistent with existing observation-based literature,
initial recovery of AGB is faster when the logging intensity is higher in
response to the improved light environment in the forest, but the time to full
AGB recovery in higher intensity logging is longer.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e8768">Consistent with observations at Tapajós, the prescribed logging event
introduces a large amount of necromass to the forest floor proportional to
the damage level of the logging event, which returns to prelogging level in
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> years. Simulated HR in the low-damage reduced-impact-logging
scenario stays elevated in the 5 years following logging and declines to be
the same as the intact forest in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> years.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e8792">The impacts of alternative logging practices on forest structure and
composition were assessed by parameterizing cohort-specific mortality
corresponding to direct felling, collateral damage, mechanical damage in the
logging module to represent different logging practices<?pagebreak page5016?> (i.e., conventional
logging and reduced impact logging), and intensity (i.e., high and low). In
all scenarios, the improved light environment after the removal of large trees
facilitates the establishment and growth of early successional trees in the 0–10 cm DBH size class proportional to the damage levels in the first 2–3 years.
Thereafter there is a transition to late successional trees in later years
when the canopy is closed. The number of early successional trees then
slowly declines but is sustained throughout the simulation as a result of
natural disturbances.</p></list-item></list></p>
      <p id="d1e8795">Given that the representation of gas exchange processes is related to, but
also somewhat independent of, the representation of ecosystem demography,
FATES shows great potential in its capability to capture ecosystem
successional processes in terms of gap-phase regeneration; competition among
light-demanding and shade-tolerant species following disturbance; and
responses of energy, water, and carbon budget components to disturbances.
The model projections suggest that while most degraded forests rapidly
recover energy fluxes, the recovery times for carbon stocks, forest size
structure, and forest composition are much longer. The recovery trajectories
are highly dependent on logging intensity and practices, the difference
between which can be directly simulated by the model. Consistent with field
studies, we find through numerical experiments that reduced impact logging
leads to more rapid recovery of the water, energy, and carbon cycles,
allowing forest structure and composition to recover to their prelogging
levels in a shorter time frame.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Future work</title>
      <p id="d1e8806">Currently, the selective logging module can only simulate single logging
events. We also assumed that for a site such as km83, once logging is
activated, trees will be harvested from all patches. For regional-scale
applications, it will be crucial to represent forest degradation as a result
of logging, fire,<?pagebreak page5017?> and fragmentation and their combinations that could repeat
over a period. Therefore, structural changes in FATES have been made by
adding prognostic variables to track disturbance histories associated with
fire, logging, and transitions among land use types. The model also needs to
include the dead tree pool (snags and standing dead wood) as harvest
operations (especially thinning) can lead to live tree death from machine
damage and windthrow. This will be more important for using FATES in
temperate, coniferous systems, and the varied biogeochemical legacy of
standing versus downed wood is important (Edburg et al., 2011, 2012). To better understand how
nutrient limitation or enhancement (e.g., via deposition or fertilization)
can affect the ecosystem dynamics, a nutrient-enabled version of FATES is
also under testing and will shed more lights on how biogeochemical cycling
could impact vegetation dynamics once available. Nevertheless, this study
lays the foundation to simulate land use change and forest degradation in
FATES, leading the way to direct representation of forest management
practices and regeneration in Earth system models.</p>
      <p id="d1e8809">We also acknowledge that as a model development study, we applied the model
to a site using a single set of parameter values, and therefore we ignored
the uncertainty associated with model parameters. Nevertheless, the
sensitivity study in the Supplement shows that the model parameters
can be calibrated with a good benchmarking dataset with various aspects of
ecosystem observations. For example, Koven et al. (2020) demonstrated a joint
team effort of modelers and field observers toward building field-based
benchmarks from Barro Colorado Island, Panama, and a parameter sensitivity
test platform for physiological and ecosystem dynamics<?pagebreak page5018?> using FATES. We
expect to see more of such efforts to better constrain the model in future
studies.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codedataavailability"><title>Code and data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e8816">CLM(FATES) has two separate repositories for CLM and FATES available
at <uri>https://github.com/ESCOMP/ctsm</uri> (last
access: 25 June 2020; <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3739617" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.3739617</ext-link>, CTSM Development Team, 2020) and
<uri>https://github.com/NGEET/fates</uri> (last access: 25 June 2020; <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3825474" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.3825474</ext-link>, FATES Development
Team, 2020).</p>

      <p id="d1e8831">Site information and data at km67 and km83 can be found at <uri>http://sites.fluxdata.org/BR-Sa1</uri> (last access: 10 Februray 2020; <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18140/FLX/1440032" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18140/FLX/1440032</ext-link>, Saleska, 2002–2011) and <uri>http://sites.fluxdata.org/BR-Sa13</uri> (last access: 10 February 2020; <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18140/FLX/1440033" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18140/FLX/1440033</ext-link>, Goulden, 2000–2004).</p>

      <p id="d1e8846">A README guide to run the model and formatted datasets used to drive model
in this study will be made available from the open-source repository
<uri>https://github.com/huangmy/FATES_Logging_Manuscript.git</uri> (Huang, 2020).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e8852">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-4999-2020-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-4999-2020-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e8861">MH, MK, and ML conceived the study, conceptualized the design of the
logging module, and designed the numerical experiments and analysis. YX,
MH, and RGK coded the<?pagebreak page5019?> module. YX, RGK, CDK, RAF, and MH
integrated the module into FATES. MH performed the numerical experiments
and wrote the manuscript with inputs from all coauthors.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e8867">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e8873">This research was supported by the Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments–Tropics project through the Terrestrial Ecosystem Science (TES) program within the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research (BER). The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory is operated by the DOE and by the Battelle Memorial Institute under contract DE-AC05-76RL01830. LBNL is managed and operated by the Regents of the University of California under prime contract no. DE-AC02-05CH11231.  The research carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, was under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NM0018D004). Marcos Longo was supported by the São Paulo State Research Foundation (FAPESP, grant 2015/07227-6) and by the NASA Postdoctoral Program, administered by the Universities Space Research Association under contract with NASA (80NM0018D004). Rosie A. Fisher acknowledges the National Science Foundation's support of the National Center for Atmospheric Research.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e8878">This research has been supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science (grant no. 66705), the São Paulo State Research Foundation (grant no. 2015/07227-6), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (grant no. 80NM0018D004), and the National Science Foundation  (grant no. 1458021).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e8884">This paper was edited by Christopher Still and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Asner, G. P., Keller, M., Pereira, J. R., Zweede, J. C., and Silva, J. N.
M.: Canopy damage and recovery after selective logging in amazonia: field
and satellite studies, Ecol. Appl., 14, 280–298, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/01-6019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/01-6019</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Asner, G. P., Knapp, D. E., Broadbent, E. N., Oliveira, P. J. C., Keller,
M., and Silva, J. N.: Selective Logging in the Brazilian Amazon, Science,
310, 480–482, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1118051" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1118051</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Asner, G. P., Keller, M., Pereira, R., and Zweed, J. C.: LBA-ECO LC-13 GIS
Coverages of Logged Areas, Tapajos Forest, Para, Brazil: 1996, 1998. ORNL
DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/893" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3334/ORNLDAAC/893</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Asner, G. P., Rudel, T. K., Aide, T. M., Defries, R., and Emerson, R.: A
Contemporary Assessment of Change in Humid Tropical Forests Una
Evaluación Contemporánea del Cambio en Bosques Tropicales
Húmedos, Conserv. Biol., 23, 1386–1395, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01333.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01333.x</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Baidya Roy, S., Hurtt, G. C., Weaver, C. P., and Pacala, S. W.: Impact of
historical land cover change on the July climate of the United States,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4793, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003565" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD003565</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Baker, I. T., Prihodko, L., Denning, A. S., Goulden, M., Miller, S., and Da
Rocha, H. R.: Seasonal drought stress in the Amazon: Reconciling models and
observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000644" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JG000644</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Baraloto, C., Hérault, B., Paine, C. E. T., Massot, H., Blanc, L., Bonal, D., Molino, J.-F., Nicolini, E. A., and Sabatier, D.: Contrasting taxonomic and
functional responses of a tropical tree community to selective logging, J.
Appl. Ecol., 49, 861–870, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02164.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02164.x</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Berenguer, E., Ferreira, J., Gardner, T. A., Aragão, L. E. O. C., De
Camargo, P. B., Cerri, C. E., Durigan, M., Oliveira, R. C. D., Vieira, I. C.
G., and Barlow, J.: A large-scale field assessment of carbon stocks in
human-modified tropical forests, Glob. Change Biol., 20, 3713–3726, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12627" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.12627</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Blaser, J., Sarre, A., Poore, D., and Johnson, S.: Status of Tropical Forest
Management 2011, International Tropical Timber Organization, Yokohama,
Japan, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bohn, K., Dyke, J. G., Pavlick, R., Reineking, B., Reu, B., and Kleidon, A.: The relative importance of seed competition, resource competition and perturbations on community structure, Biogeosciences, 8, 1107–1120, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-8-1107-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-8-1107-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bonan, G. B.: Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the
Climate Benefits of Forests, Science, 320, 1444–1449,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1155121" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1155121</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Both, S., Riutta, T., Paine, C. E. T., Elias, D. M. O., Cruz, R. S., Jain, A., Johnson, D., Kritzler, U. H., Kuntz, M., Majalap-Lee, N., Mielke, N., Montoya Pillco, M. X., Ostle, N. J., Arn Teh, Y., Malhi, Y., and Burslem, D. F. R. P.: Logging and soil nutrients independently explain plant trait expression in tropical forests, New Phytol., 221, 1853–1865, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15444" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/nph.15444</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bradshaw, C. J. A., Sodhi, N. S., and Brook, B. W.: Tropical turmoil: a
biodiversity tragedy in progress, Front. Ecol. Environ.,
7, 79–87, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/070193" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/070193</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brokaw, N.: Gap-Phase Regeneration in a Tropical Forest, Ecology, 66,
682–687, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1940529" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2307/1940529</ext-link>, 1985.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bustamante, M. M. C., Roitman, I., Aide, T. M., Alencar, A., Anderson, L.,
Aragão, L., Asner, G. P., Barlow, J., Berenguer, E., Chambers, J.,
Costa, M. H., Fanin, T., Ferreira, L. G., Ferreira, J. N., Keller, M.,
Magnusson, W. E., Morales, L., Morton, D., Ometto, J. P. H. B., Palace, M.,
Peres, C., Silvério, D., Trumbore, S., and Vieira, I. C. G.: Towards an
integrated monitoring framework to assess the effects of tropical forest
degradation and recovery on carbon stocks and biodiversity, Glob. Change
Biol., 22, 92–109, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13087" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.13087</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chambers, J. Q., Tribuzy, E. S., Toledo, L. C., Crispim, B. F., Higuchi, N.,
Santos, J. d., Araújo, A. C., Kruijt, B., Nobre, A. D., and Trumbore, S.
E.: RESPIRATION FROM A TROPICAL FOREST ECOSYSTEM: PARTITIONING OF SOURCES AND 725 LOW CARBON USE EFFICIENCY, Ecol. Appl., 14, 72–88, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/01-6012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/01-6012</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page5020?><ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Christoffersen, B. O., Gloor, M., Fauset, S., Fyllas, N. M., Galbraith, D. R., Baker, T. R., Kruijt, B., Rowland, L., Fisher, R. A., Binks, O. J., Sevanto, S., Xu, C., Jansen, S., Choat, B., Mencuccini, M., McDowell, N. G., and Meir, P.: Linking hydraulic traits to tropical forest function in a size-structured and trait-driven model (TFS v.1-Hydro), Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 4227–4255, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4227-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-9-4227-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>CTSM Development Team: ESCOMP/CTSM: Update documentation for release-clm5.0 branch, and fix issues with no-anthro surface dataset creation (Version release-clm5.0.34), Zenodo, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3779821" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.3779821</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>de Gonçalves, L. G. G., Borak, J. S., Costa, M. H., Saleska, S. R.,
Baker, I., Restrepo-Coupe, N., Muza, M. N., Poulter, B., Verbeeck, H.,
Fisher, J. B., Arain, M. A., Arkin, P., Cestaro, B. P., Christoffersen, B.,
Galbraith, D., Guan, X., van den Hurk, B. J. J. M., Ichii, K., Imbuzeiro, H.
M. A., Jain, A. K., Levine, N., Lu, C., Miguez-Macho, G., Roberti, D. R.,
Sahoo, A., Sakaguchi, K., Schaefer, K., Shi, M., Shuttleworth, W. J., Tian,
H., Yang, Z.-L., and Zeng, X.: Overview of the Large-Scale
Biosphere–Atmosphere Experiment in Amazonia Data Model Intercomparison
Project (LBA-DMIP), Agr. Forest Meteorol., 182–183, 111–127,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.04.030" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.04.030</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>de Sousa, C. A. D., Elliot, J. R., Read, E. L., Figueira, A. M. S., Miller, S. D., and Goulden, M. L.: LBA-ECO CD-04 Logging Damage, km 83 Tower Site, Tapajos
National Forest, Brazil. ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1038" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1038</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dirzo, R., Young, H. S., Galetti, M., Ceballos, G., Isaac, N. J. B., and Collen, B.: Defaunation in the Anthropocene, Science, 345, 401–406, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251817" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1251817</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dlugokencky, E. J., Hall, B. D., Montzka, S. A., Dutton, G., Mühle, J.,
and Elkins, J. W.: Atmospheric composition [in <italic>State of the Climate in 2017</italic>], B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 99, S46–S49, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Domingues, T. F., Berry, J. A., Martinelli, L. A., Ometto, J. P. H. B., and
Ehleringer, J. R.: Parameterization of Canopy Structure and Leaf-Level Gas
Exchange for an Eastern Amazonian Tropical Rain Forest (Tapajós National
Forest, Pará, Brazil), Earth Interact., 9, 1–23, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/ei149.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/ei149.1</ext-link>,
2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dykstra, D. P.: Reduced impact logging: concepts and issues, Applying
Reduced Impact Logging to Advance Sustainable Forest Management, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand, 23–39, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Edburg, S. L., Hicke, J. A., Lawrence, D. M., and Thornton, P. E.:
Simulating coupled carbon and nitrogen dynamics following mountain pine
beetle outbreaks in the western United States, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 116, G04033, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JG001786" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JG001786</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Edburg, S. L., Hicke, J. A., Brooks, P. D., Pendall, E. G., Ewers, B. E.,
Norton, U., Gochis, D., Gutmann, E. D., and Meddens, A. J. H.: Cascading
impacts of bark beetle-caused tree mortality on coupled biogeophysical and
biogeochemical processes, Front. Ecol. Environ., 10, 416–424, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Erb, K.-H., Kastner, T., Plutzar, C., Bais, A. L. S., Carvalhais, N.,
Fetzel, T., Gingrich, S., Haberl, H., Lauk, C., Niedertscheider, M.,
Pongratz, J., Thurner, M., and Luyssaert, S.: Unexpectedly large impact of
forest management and grazing on global vegetation biomass, Nature, 553, 73–76, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25138" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nature25138</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>FATES Development Team: The Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES) (Version sci.1.35.5_api.11.0.0), Zenodo, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3825474" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.3825474</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Feldpausch, T. R., Jirka, S., Passos, C. A. M., Jasper, F., and Riha, S. J.:
When big trees fall: Damage and carbon export by reduced impact logging in
southern Amazonia, Forest Ecol. Manag., 219, 199–215,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.09.003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.foreco.2005.09.003</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Figueira, A. M. E. S., Miller, S. D., de Sousa, C. A. D., Menton, M. C.,
Maia, A. R., da Rocha, H. R., and Goulden, M. L.: Effects of selective
logging on tropical forest tree growth, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, G00B05, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000577" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JG000577</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fisher, R., McDowell, N., Purves, D., Moorcroft, P., Sitch, S., Cox, P.,
Huntingford, C., Meir, P., and Ian Woodward, F.: Assessing uncertainties in
a second-generation dynamic vegetation model caused by ecological scale
limitations, New Phytol., 187, 666–681,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03340.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03340.x</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fisher R. A., Williams, M., Lola da Costa, A., Malhi, Y., da Costa, R. F., Almeida, S., and Meir, P.: The response of an Eastern Amazonian rain forest to drought stress: Results and modeling analyses from a through-fall exclusion experiment, Glob. Change Biol., 13, 2361–2378, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fisher R. A., Williams M., Ruivo M. L., Sombroek W. G., and Lola da Costa, A.: Evaluating climatic and edaphic controls of drought stress at two Amazonian rain forest sites, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 148, 850–861, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fisher, R. A., Muszala, S., Verteinstein, M., Lawrence, P., Xu, C., McDowell, N. G., Knox, R. G., Koven, C., Holm, J., Rogers, B. M., Spessa, A., Lawrence, D., and Bonan, G.: Taking off the training wheels: the properties of a dynamic vegetation model without climate envelopes, CLM4.5(ED), Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3593–3619, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3593-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-8-3593-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Anderegg, W. R. L., Christoffersen, B. O.,
Dietze, M. C., Farrior, C. E., Holm, J. A., Hurtt, G. C., Knox, R. G.,
Lawrence, P. J., Lichstein, J. W., Longo, M., Matheny, A. M., Medvigy, D.,
Muller-Landau, H. C., Powell, T. L., Serbin, S. P., Sato, H., Shuman, J. K.,
Smith, B., Trugman, A. T., Viskari, T., Verbeeck, H., Weng, E., Xu, C., Xu,
X., Zhang, T., and Moorcroft, P. R.: Vegetation demographics in Earth System
Models: A review of progress and priorities, Glob. Change Biol., 24, 35–54, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13910" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.13910</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Foken, T.: THE ENERGY BALANCE CLOSURE PROBLEM: AN OVERVIEW, Ecol.
Appl., 18, 1351–1367, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/06-0922.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/06-0922.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Goulden, M.: FLUXNET2015 BR-Sa3 Santarem-Km83-Logged Forest, Dataset, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18140/FLX/1440033" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18140/FLX/1440033</ext-link>, 2000–2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Goulden, M. L., Miller, S. D., da Rocha, H. R., Menton, M. C., de Freitas,
H. C., e Silva Figueira, A. M., and de Sousa, C. A. D.: DIEL AND SEASONAL PATTERNS OF TROPICAL FOREST <inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> EXCHANGE, Ecol. Appl., 14,
42–54, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/02-6008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/02-6008</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Goulden, M. L., Miller, S. D., and da Rocha, H. R.: LBA-ECO CD-04 Soil
Moisture Data, km 83 Tower Site, Tapajos National Forest, Brazil. ORNL DAAC,
Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/979" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3334/ORNLDAAC/979</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hayek, M. N., Wehr, R., Longo, M., Hutyra, L. R., Wiedemann, K., Munger, J.
W., Bonal, D., Saleska, S. R., Fitzjarrald, D. R.<?pagebreak page5021?>, and Wofsy, S. C.: A novel
correction for biases in forest eddy covariance carbon balance, Agr.
Forest Meteorol., 250–251, 90–101,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.12.186" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.12.186</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Huang, M.: Script Repository for the FATES Logging Manuscript, GitHub, available at: <uri>https://github.com/huangmy/FATES_Logging_Manuscript.git</uri> (last access: 28 June 2020), 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Huang, M. and Asner, G. P.: Long-term carbon loss and recovery following
selective logging in Amazon forests, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 24,
GB3028, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GB003727" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009GB003727</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Huang, M., Asner, G. P., Keller, M., and Berry, J. A.: An ecosystem model
for tropical forest disturbance and selective logging, J.
Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, G01002, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000438" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JG000438</ext-link>,
2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hurtt, G. C., Moorcroft, P. R., And, S. W. P., and Levin, S. A.: Terrestrial
models and global change: challenges for the future, Glob. Change Biol.,
4, 581–590, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.t01-1-00203.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.t01-1-00203.x</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hurtt, G. C., Chini, L. P., Frolking, S., Betts, R. A., Feddema, J.,
Fischer, G., Fisk, J. P., Hibbard, K., Houghton, R. A., Janetos, A., Jones,
C. D., Kindermann, G., Kinoshita, T., Klein Goldewijk, K., Riahi, K.,
Shevliakova, E., Smith, S., Stehfest, E., Thomson, A., Thornton, P., van
Vuuren, D. P., and Wang, Y. P.: Harmonization of land-use scenarios for the
period 1500–2100: 600 years of global gridded annual land-use transitions,
wood harvest, and resulting secondary lands, Climatic Change, 109, 117–161,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0153-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10584-011-0153-2</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Keller, M., Palace, M., and Hurtt, G.: Biomass estimation in the Tapajos
National Forest, Brazil: Examination of sampling and allometric
uncertainties, Forest Ecol. Manag., 154, 371–382,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00509-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00509-6</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Keller, M., Alencar, A., Asner, G. P., Braswell, B., Bustamante, M.,
Davidson, E., Feldpausch, T., Fernandes, E., Goulden, M., Kabat, P., Kruijt,
B., Luizão, F., Miller, S., Markewitz, D., Nobre, A. D., Nobre, C. A.,
Priante Filho, N., da Rocha, H., Silva Dias, P., von Randow, C., and
Vourlitis, G. L.: ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN THE LARGE-SCALE BIOSPHERE–ATMOSPHERE EXPERIMENT IN AMAZONIA: EARLY RESULTS, Ecol. Appl.,
14, 3–16, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/03-6003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/03-6003</ext-link>, 2004a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Keller, M., Palace, M., Asner, G. P., Pereira, R., and Silva, J. N. M.:
Coarse woody debris in undisturbed and logged forests in the eastern
Brazilian Amazon, Glob. Change Biol., 10, 784–795,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00770.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00770.x</ext-link>, 2004b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Koven, C. D., Knox, R. G., Fisher, R. A., Chambers, J. Q., Christoffersen, B. O., Davies, S. J., Detto, M., Dietze, M. C., Faybishenko, B., Holm, J., Huang, M., Kovenock, M., Kueppers, L. M., Lemieux, G., Massoud, E., McDowell, N. G., Muller-Landau, H. C., Needham, J. F., Norby, R. J., Powell, T., Rogers, A., Serbin, S. P., Shuman, J. K., Swann, A. L. S., Varadharajan, C., Walker, A. P., Wright, S. J., and Xu, C.: Benchmarking and parameter sensitivity of physiological and vegetation dynamics using the Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES) at Barro Colorado Island, Panama, Biogeosciences, 17, 3017–3044, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-3017-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-17-3017-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lawrence, P. J., Feddema, J. J., Bonan, G. B., Meehl, G. A., O'Neill, B. C.,
Oleson, K. W., Levis, S., Lawrence, D. M., Kluzek, E., Lindsay, K., and
Thornton, P. E.: Simulating the Biogeochemical and Biogeophysical Impacts of
Transient Land Cover Change and Wood Harvest in the Community Climate System
Model (CCSM4) from 1850 to 2100, J. Climate, 25, 3071–3095,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00256.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/jcli-d-11-00256.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Longo, M., Knox, R. G., Levine, N. M., Alves, L. F., Bonal, D., Camargo, P. B., Fitzjarrald, D. R., Hayek, M. N., Restrepo-Coupe, N., Saleska, S. R., da
Silva, R., Stark, S. C., Tapaj ìos, R. P., Wiedemann, K. T., Zhang, K., Wofsy, S. C., and Moorcroft, P. R.: Ecosystem heterogeneity and diversity mitigate Amazon
forest resilience to frequent extreme droughts, New Phytol.,
219, 914–931, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/nph" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/nph</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Longo, M., Knox, R. G., Levine, N. M., Swann, A. L. S., Medvigy, D. M., Dietze, M. C., Kim, Y., Zhang, K., Bonal, D., Burban, B., Camargo, P. B., Hayek, M. N., Saleska, S. R., da Silva, R., Bras, R. L., Wofsy, S. C., and Moorcroft, P. R.: The biophysics, ecology, and biogeochemistry of functionally diverse, vertically and horizontally heterogeneous ecosystems: the Ecosystem Demography model, version 2.2 – Part 2: Model evaluation for tropical South America, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4347–4374, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4347-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-12-4347-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Luyssaert, S., Schulze, E. D., Borner, A., Knohl, A., Hessenmoller, D., Law,
B. E., Ciais, P., and Grace, J.: Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks,
Nature, 455, 213–215, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07276" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nature07276</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Macpherson, A. J., Carter, D. R., Schulze, M. D., Vidal, E., and Lentini, M.
W.: The sustainability of timber production from Eastern Amazonian forests,
Land Use Policy, 29, 339–350,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.07.004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.07.004</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Martínez-Ramos, M., Ortiz-Rodríguez, I. A., Piñero, D., Dirzo,
R., and Sarukhán, J.: Anthropogenic disturbances jeopardize biodiversity
conservation within tropical rainforest reserves, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 5323–5328, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1602893113" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1602893113</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Massoud, E. C., Xu, C., Fisher, R. A., Knox, R. G., Walker, A. P., Serbin, S. P., Christoffersen, B. O., Holm, J. A., Kueppers, L. M., Ricciuto, D. M., Wei, L., Johnson, D. J., Chambers, J. Q., Koven, C. D., McDowell, N. G., and Vrugt, J. A.: Identification of key parameters controlling demographically structured vegetation dynamics in a land surface model: CLM4.5(FATES), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4133–4164, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4133-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-12-4133-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mazzei, L., Sist, P., Ruschel, A., Putz, F. E., Marco, P., Pena, W., and
Ferreira, J. E. R.: Above-ground biomass dynamics after reduced-impact
logging in the Eastern Amazon, Forest Ecol. Manag., 259, 367–373,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.10.031" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.foreco.2009.10.031</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Menton, M. C., Figueira, A. M. S., de Sousa, C. A. D., Miller, S. D., da Rocha, H. R., and Goulden, M. L.: LBA-ECO CD-04 Biomass Survey, km 83 Tower Site, Tapajos National Forest, Brazil. ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/990" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3334/ORNLDAAC/990</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Miller, S. D., Goulden, M. L., Menton, M. C., da Rocha, H. R., de Freitas,
H. C., Figueira, A. M. e. S., and Dias de Sousa, C. A.: BIOMETRIC AND
MICROMETEOROLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS OF TROPICAL FOREST CARBON BALANCE,
Ecol. Appl., 14, 114–126, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/02-6005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/02-6005</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page5022?><ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Miller, S. D., Goulden, M. L., Hutyra, L. R., Keller, M., Saleska, S. R.,
Wofsy, S. C., Figueira, A. M. S., da Rocha, H. R., and de Camargo, P. B.:
Reduced impact logging minimally alters tropical rainforest carbon and
energy exchange, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 19431–19435, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1105068108" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1105068108</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Moorcroft, P. R., Hurtt, G. C., and Pacala, S. W.: A METHOD FOR SCALING
VEGETATION DYNAMICS: THE ECOSYSTEM DEMOGRAPHY MODEL (ED), Ecol.
Monogr., 71, 557–586, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9615(2001)071[0557:AMFSVD]2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/0012-9615(2001)071[0557:AMFSVD]2.0.CO;2</ext-link>,
2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Nepstad, D. C., Verssimo, A., Alencar, A., Nobre, C., Lima, E., Lefebvre,
P., Schlesinger, P., Potter, C., Moutinho, P., Mendoza, E., Cochrane, M.,
and Brooks, V.: Large-scale impoverishment of Amazonian forests by logging
and fire, Nature, 398, 505–508, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Oleson, K. W., Lawrence, D. M., Bonan, G. B., Drewniak, B., Huang, M.,
Koven, C. D., Levis, S., Li, F., Riley, W. J., Subin, Z. M., Swenson, S. C.,
Thornton, P. E., Bozbiyik, A., Fisher, R., Kluzek, E., Lamarque, J.-F.,
Lawrence, P. J., Leung, L. R., Lipscomb, W., Muszala, S., Ricciuto, D. M.,
Sacks, W., Sun, Y., Tang, J., and Yang, Z.-L.: Technical Description of
version 4.5 of the Community Land Model (CLM), National Center for
Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CONcar Technical Note NCAR/TN-503<inline-formula><mml:math id="M455" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>STR,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Palace, M., Keller, M., and Silva, H.: NECROMASS PRODUCTION: STUDIES IN
UNDISTURBED AND LOGGED AMAZON FORESTS, Ecol. Appl., 18, 873–884,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/06-2022.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/06-2022.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Pan, Y., Birdsey, R. A., Fang, J., Houghton, R., Kauppi, P. E., Kurz, W. A.,
Phillips, O. L., Shvidenko, A., Lewis, S. L., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P.,
Jackson, R. B., Pacala, S. W., McGuire, A. D., Piao, S., Rautiainen, A.,
Sitch, S., and Hayes, D.: A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World's
Forests, Science, 333, 988–993, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pearson, T., Brown, S., and Casarim, F.: Carbon emissions from tropical
forest degradation caused by logging, Environ. Res. Lett., 9,
034017, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/3/034017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/9/3/034017</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pereira Jr., R., Zweede, J., Asner, G. P., and Keller, M.: Forest canopy
damage and recovery in reduced-impact and conventional selective logging in
eastern Para, Brazil, Forest Ecol. Manag., 168, 77–89,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00732-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00732-0</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Piponiot, C., Derroire, G., Descroix, L., Mazzei, L., Rutishauser, E., Sist, P., and Hérault, B.: Assessing timber volume recovery after disturbance in
tropical forests – a new modelling framework, Ecol. Model., 384, 353–369,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.05.023" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.05.023</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Powell, T. L., Galbraith, D. R., Christoffersen, B. O., Harper, A., Imbuzeiro,
H. M., Rowland, L., Almeida, S., Brando, P. M., da Costa, A. C. L., Costa, M. H., and Levine, N. M.: Confronting model predictions of carbon fluxes with
measurements of Amazon forests subjected to experimental drought, New
Phytol., 200, 350–365, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Putz, F. E., Sist, P., Fredericksen, T., and Dykstra, D.: Reduced-impact
logging: Challenges and opportunities, Forest Ecol. Manag., 256,
1427–1433, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.03.036" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.foreco.2008.03.036</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Reich, P. B: The world‐wide `fast–slow' plant economics spectrum: a traits manifesto, J. Ecol., 102, 275–301,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12211" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/1365-2745.12211</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rice, A. H., Pyle, E. H., Saleska, S. R., Hutyra, L., Palace, M., Keller,
M., de Camargo, P. B., Portilho, K., Marques, D. F., and Wofsy, S. C.:
CARBON BALANCE AND VEGETATION DYNAMICS IN AN OLD-GROWTH AMAZONIAN FOREST,
Ecol. Appl., 14, 55–71, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/02-6006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/02-6006</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Saleska, S.: FLUXNET2015 BR-Sa1 Santarem-Km67-Primary Forest, Dataset, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18140/FLX/1440032" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18140/FLX/1440032</ext-link>, 2002–2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Saleska, S. R., Miller, S. D., Matross, D. M., Goulden, M. L., Wofsy, S. C., da Rocha, H. R., de Camargo, P. B., Crill, P., Daube, B. C., de Freitas, H. C., Hutyra, L., Keller, M., Kirchhoff, V., Menton, M., Munger, J. W., Pyle, E. H., Rice, A. H., and Silva, H.: Carbon in Amazon Forests: Unexpected Seasonal Fluxes
and Disturbance-Induced Losses, Science, 302, 1554–1557, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1091165" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1091165</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Saleska, S. R., da Rocha, H. R., Huete, A. R., Nobre, A.D., Artaxo, P., and
Shimabukuro, Y. E.: LBA-ECO CD-32 Flux Tower Network Data Compilation,
Brazilian Amazon: 1999–2006, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Distributed Active Archive Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1174" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1174</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sato, H., Itoh, A., and Kohyama, T.: SEIB–DGVM: A new Dynamic Global
Vegetation Model using a spatially explicit individual-based approach,
Ecol. Model., 200, 279–307,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.09.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.09.006</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Shevliakova, E., Pacala, S. W., Malyshev, S., Hurtt, G. C., Milly, P. C. D.,
Caspersen, J. P., Sentman, L. T., Fisk, J. P., Wirth, C., and Crevoisier, C.:
Carbon cycling under 300 years of land use change: Importance of the
secondary vegetation sink, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 23, GB2022,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GB003176" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007GB003176</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Silver, W. L., Neff, J., McGroddy, M., Veldkamp, E., Keller, M., and Cosme,
R.: Effects of Soil Texture on Belowground Carbon and Nutrient Storage in a
Lowland Amazonian Forest Ecosystem, Ecosystems, 3, 193–209, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s100210000019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s100210000019</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sist, P., Rutishauser, E., Peña-Claros, M., Shenkin, A., Hérault,
B., Blanc, L., Baraloto, C., Baya, F., Benedet, F., da Silva, K. E.,
Descroix, L., Ferreira, J. N., Gourlet-Fleury, S., Guedes, M. C., Bin Harun,
I., Jalonen, R., Kanashiro, M., Krisnawati, H., Kshatriya, M., Lincoln, P.,
Mazzei, L., Medjibé, V., Nasi, R., d'Oliveira, M. V. N., de Oliveira, L.
C., Picard, N., Pietsch, S., Pinard, M., Priyadi, H., Putz, F. E., Rodney,
K., Rossi, V., Roopsind, A., Ruschel, A. R., Shari, N. H. Z., Rodrigues de
Souza, C., Susanty, F. H., Sotta, E. D., Toledo, M., Vidal, E., West, T. A.
P., Wortel, V., and Yamada, T.: The Tropical managed Forests Observatory: a
research network addressing the future of tropical logged forests, Appl.
Veg. Sci., 18, 171–174, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12125" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/avsc.12125</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Smith, B., Prentice, I. C., and Sykes, M. T.: Representation of vegetation
dynamics in the modelling of terrestrial ecosystems: comparing two
contrasting approaches within European climate space, Global Ecol.
Biogeogr., 10, 621–637, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1466-822X.2001.t01-1-00256.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1046/j.1466-822X.2001.t01-1-00256.x</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Smith, B., Wårlind, D., Arneth, A., Hickler, T., Leadley, P., Siltberg, J., and Zaehle, S.: Implications of incorporating N cycling and N limitations on primary production in an individual-based dynamic vegetation model, Biogeosciences, 11, 2027–2054, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2027-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-11-2027-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page5023?><ref id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Strigul, N., Pristinski, D., Purves, D., Dushoff, J., and Pacala, S.:
SCALING FROM TREES TO FORESTS: TRACTABLE MACROSCOPIC EQUATIONS FOR FOREST
DYNAMICS, Ecol. Monogr., 78, 523–545, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1890/08-0082.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1890/08-0082.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Thonicke, K., Spessa, A., Prentice, I. C., Harrison, S. P., Dong, L., and Carmona-Moreno, C.: The influence of vegetation, fire spread and fire behaviour on biomass burning and trace gas emissions: results from a process-based model, Biogeosciences, 7, 1991–2011, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-1991-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-7-1991-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Tomasella, J. and Hodnett, M. G.: Estimating soil water retention
characteristics from limited data in Brazilian Amazonia, Soil Sci.,
163, 190–202, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Trumbore, S. and Barbosa De Camargo, P.: Soil carbon dynamics, Amazonia and
global change, American Geophysical Union, Washington DC, 451–462, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Watanabe, S., Hajima, T., Sudo, K., Nagashima, T., Takemura, T., Okajima,
H., Nozawa, T., Kawase, H., Abe, M., Yokohata, T., Ise, T., Sato, H., Kato,
E., Takata, K., Emori, S., and Kawamiya, M.: MIROC-ESM 2010: model
description and basic results of CMIP5-20c3m experiments, Geosci. Model
Dev., 4, 845–872, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-845-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-4-845-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Weng, E. S., Malyshev, S., Lichstein, J. W., Farrior, C. E., Dybzinski, R., Zhang, T., Shevliakova, E., and Pacala, S. W.: Scaling from individual trees to forests in an Earth system modeling framework using a mathematically tractable model of height-structured competition, Biogeosciences, 12, 2655–2694, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-2655-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-12-2655-2015</ext-link>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Whitmore, T. C.: An Introduction to Tropical Rain Forests, Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, USA, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wilson, K., Goldstein, A., Falge, E., Aubinet, M., Baldocchi, D., Berbigier,
P., Bernhofer, C., Ceulemans, R., Dolman, H., Field, C., Grelle, A., Ibrom,
A., Law, B. E., Kowalski, A., Meyers, T., Moncrieff, J., Monson, R., Oechel,
W., Tenhunen, J., Valentini, R., and Verma, S.: Energy balance closure at
FLUXNET sites, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 113, 223–243,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(02)00109-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0168-1923(02)00109-0</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wright, I. J., Reich, P. B., Westoby, M., and Ackerly, D. D.: The worldwide
leaf economics spectrum, Nature, 428, 821–827,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02403" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nature02403</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wu, J., Albert, L. P., Lopes, A. P., Restrepo-Coupe, N., Hayek, M., Wiedemann,
K. T., Guan, K., Stark, S. C., Christoffersen, B., Prohaska, N., and Tavares,
J. V.: Leaf development and demography explain photosynthetic
seasonality in Amazon evergreen forests, Science, 351, 972–976, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wu, J., Guan, K., Hayek, M., Restrepo-Coupe, N., Wiedemann, K. T., Xu, X., Wehr, R., Christoffersen, B. O., Miao, G., da Silva, R., de Araujo, A. C., Oliviera, R. C., Camargo, P. B., Monson, R. K., Huete, A. R., and Saleska, S. R.: Partitioning controls on
Amazon forest photosynthesis between environmental and biotic factors at
hourly to interannual timescales, Glob. Change Biol., 23, 1240–1257,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13509" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.13509</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Assessing impacts of selective logging on water, energy, and carbon budgets and ecosystem dynamics in Amazon forests using the Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Tropical forest degradation from logging, fire, and fragmentation not only
alters carbon stocks and carbon fluxes, but also impacts physical
land surface properties such as albedo and roughness length. Such impacts
are poorly quantified to date due to difficulties in accessing and
maintaining observational infrastructures, as well as the lack of proper modeling
tools for capturing the interactions among biophysical properties, ecosystem
demography, canopy structure, and biogeochemical cycling in tropical
forests. As a first step to address these limitations, we implemented a
selective logging module into the Functionally Assembled Terrestrial
Ecosystem Simulator (FATES) by mimicking the ecological, biophysical, and
biogeochemical processes following a logging event. The model can specify
the timing and aerial extent of logging events, splitting the logged forest
patch into disturbed and intact patches; determine the survivorship of
cohorts in the disturbed patch; and modifying the biomass and necromass
(total mass of coarse woody debris and litter) pools following logging. We
parameterized the logging module to reproduce a selective logging experiment
at the Tapajós National Forest in Brazil and benchmarked model outputs
against available field measurements. Our results suggest that the model
permits the coexistence of early and late successional functional types and
realistically characterizes the seasonality of water and carbon fluxes and
stocks, the forest structure and composition, and the ecosystem succession
following disturbance. However, the current version of FATES overestimates
water stress in the dry season and therefore fails to capture seasonal variation
in latent and sensible heat fluxes. Moreover, we observed a bias towards low
stem density and leaf area when compared to observations, suggesting that
improvements are needed in both carbon allocation and establishment of
trees. The effects of logging were assessed by different logging scenarios
to represent reduced impact and conventional logging practices, both with
high and low logging intensities. The model simulations suggest that in
comparison to old-growth forests the logged forests rapidly recover water
and energy fluxes in 1 to 3 years. In contrast, the recovery times for
carbon stocks, forest structure, and composition are more than 30 years
depending on logging practices and intensity. This study lays the foundation
to simulate land use change and forest degradation in FATES, which will be
an effective tool to directly represent forest management practices and
regeneration in the context of Earth system models.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Asner, G. P., Keller, M., Pereira, J. R., Zweede, J. C., and Silva, J. N.
M.: Canopy damage and recovery after selective logging in amazonia: field
and satellite studies, Ecol. Appl., 14, 280–298, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/01-6019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/01-6019</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Asner, G. P., Knapp, D. E., Broadbent, E. N., Oliveira, P. J. C., Keller,
M., and Silva, J. N.: Selective Logging in the Brazilian Amazon, Science,
310, 480–482, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1118051" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1118051</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Asner, G. P., Keller, M., Pereira, R., and Zweed, J. C.: LBA-ECO LC-13 GIS
Coverages of Logged Areas, Tapajos Forest, Para, Brazil: 1996, 1998. ORNL
DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/893" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/893</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Asner, G. P., Rudel, T. K., Aide, T. M., Defries, R., and Emerson, R.: A
Contemporary Assessment of Change in Humid Tropical Forests Una
Evaluación Contemporánea del Cambio en Bosques Tropicales
Húmedos, Conserv. Biol., 23, 1386–1395, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01333.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01333.x</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Baidya Roy, S., Hurtt, G. C., Weaver, C. P., and Pacala, S. W.: Impact of
historical land cover change on the July climate of the United States,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4793, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003565" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003565</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Baker, I. T., Prihodko, L., Denning, A. S., Goulden, M., Miller, S., and Da
Rocha, H. R.: Seasonal drought stress in the Amazon: Reconciling models and
observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000644" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000644</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Baraloto, C., Hérault, B., Paine, C. E. T., Massot, H., Blanc, L., Bonal, D., Molino, J.-F., Nicolini, E. A., and Sabatier, D.: Contrasting taxonomic and
functional responses of a tropical tree community to selective logging, J.
Appl. Ecol., 49, 861–870, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02164.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02164.x</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Berenguer, E., Ferreira, J., Gardner, T. A., Aragão, L. E. O. C., De
Camargo, P. B., Cerri, C. E., Durigan, M., Oliveira, R. C. D., Vieira, I. C.
G., and Barlow, J.: A large-scale field assessment of carbon stocks in
human-modified tropical forests, Glob. Change Biol., 20, 3713–3726, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12627" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12627</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Blaser, J., Sarre, A., Poore, D., and Johnson, S.: Status of Tropical Forest
Management 2011, International Tropical Timber Organization, Yokohama,
Japan, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Bohn, K., Dyke, J. G., Pavlick, R., Reineking, B., Reu, B., and Kleidon, A.: The relative importance of seed competition, resource competition and perturbations on community structure, Biogeosciences, 8, 1107–1120, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-8-1107-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-8-1107-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Bonan, G. B.: Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the
Climate Benefits of Forests, Science, 320, 1444–1449,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1155121" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1155121</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Both, S., Riutta, T., Paine, C. E. T., Elias, D. M. O., Cruz, R. S., Jain, A., Johnson, D., Kritzler, U. H., Kuntz, M., Majalap-Lee, N., Mielke, N., Montoya Pillco, M. X., Ostle, N. J., Arn Teh, Y., Malhi, Y., and Burslem, D. F. R. P.: Logging and soil nutrients independently explain plant trait expression in tropical forests, New Phytol., 221, 1853–1865, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15444" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15444</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Bradshaw, C. J. A., Sodhi, N. S., and Brook, B. W.: Tropical turmoil: a
biodiversity tragedy in progress, Front. Ecol. Environ.,
7, 79–87, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/070193" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/070193</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Brokaw, N.: Gap-Phase Regeneration in a Tropical Forest, Ecology, 66,
682–687, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/1940529" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2307/1940529</a>, 1985.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Bustamante, M. M. C., Roitman, I., Aide, T. M., Alencar, A., Anderson, L.,
Aragão, L., Asner, G. P., Barlow, J., Berenguer, E., Chambers, J.,
Costa, M. H., Fanin, T., Ferreira, L. G., Ferreira, J. N., Keller, M.,
Magnusson, W. E., Morales, L., Morton, D., Ometto, J. P. H. B., Palace, M.,
Peres, C., Silvério, D., Trumbore, S., and Vieira, I. C. G.: Towards an
integrated monitoring framework to assess the effects of tropical forest
degradation and recovery on carbon stocks and biodiversity, Glob. Change
Biol., 22, 92–109, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13087" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13087</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Chambers, J. Q., Tribuzy, E. S., Toledo, L. C., Crispim, B. F., Higuchi, N.,
Santos, J. d., Araújo, A. C., Kruijt, B., Nobre, A. D., and Trumbore, S.
E.: RESPIRATION FROM A TROPICAL FOREST ECOSYSTEM: PARTITIONING OF SOURCES AND 725 LOW CARBON USE EFFICIENCY, Ecol. Appl., 14, 72–88, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/01-6012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/01-6012</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Christoffersen, B. O., Gloor, M., Fauset, S., Fyllas, N. M., Galbraith, D. R., Baker, T. R., Kruijt, B., Rowland, L., Fisher, R. A., Binks, O. J., Sevanto, S., Xu, C., Jansen, S., Choat, B., Mencuccini, M., McDowell, N. G., and Meir, P.: Linking hydraulic traits to tropical forest function in a size-structured and trait-driven model (TFS v.1-Hydro), Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 4227–4255, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4227-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4227-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
CTSM Development Team: ESCOMP/CTSM: Update documentation for release-clm5.0 branch, and fix issues with no-anthro surface dataset creation (Version release-clm5.0.34), Zenodo, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3779821" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3779821</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
de Gonçalves, L. G. G., Borak, J. S., Costa, M. H., Saleska, S. R.,
Baker, I., Restrepo-Coupe, N., Muza, M. N., Poulter, B., Verbeeck, H.,
Fisher, J. B., Arain, M. A., Arkin, P., Cestaro, B. P., Christoffersen, B.,
Galbraith, D., Guan, X., van den Hurk, B. J. J. M., Ichii, K., Imbuzeiro, H.
M. A., Jain, A. K., Levine, N., Lu, C., Miguez-Macho, G., Roberti, D. R.,
Sahoo, A., Sakaguchi, K., Schaefer, K., Shi, M., Shuttleworth, W. J., Tian,
H., Yang, Z.-L., and Zeng, X.: Overview of the Large-Scale
Biosphere–Atmosphere Experiment in Amazonia Data Model Intercomparison
Project (LBA-DMIP), Agr. Forest Meteorol., 182–183, 111–127,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.04.030" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.04.030</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
de Sousa, C. A. D., Elliot, J. R., Read, E. L., Figueira, A. M. S., Miller, S. D., and Goulden, M. L.: LBA-ECO CD-04 Logging Damage, km 83 Tower Site, Tapajos
National Forest, Brazil. ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1038" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1038</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Dirzo, R., Young, H. S., Galetti, M., Ceballos, G., Isaac, N. J. B., and Collen, B.: Defaunation in the Anthropocene, Science, 345, 401–406, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251817" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251817</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Dlugokencky, E. J., Hall, B. D., Montzka, S. A., Dutton, G., Mühle, J.,
and Elkins, J. W.: Atmospheric composition [in <i>State of the Climate in 2017</i>], B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 99, S46–S49, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Domingues, T. F., Berry, J. A., Martinelli, L. A., Ometto, J. P. H. B., and
Ehleringer, J. R.: Parameterization of Canopy Structure and Leaf-Level Gas
Exchange for an Eastern Amazonian Tropical Rain Forest (Tapajós National
Forest, Pará, Brazil), Earth Interact., 9, 1–23, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/ei149.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/ei149.1</a>,
2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Dykstra, D. P.: Reduced impact logging: concepts and issues, Applying
Reduced Impact Logging to Advance Sustainable Forest Management, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand, 23–39, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Edburg, S. L., Hicke, J. A., Lawrence, D. M., and Thornton, P. E.:
Simulating coupled carbon and nitrogen dynamics following mountain pine
beetle outbreaks in the western United States, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 116, G04033, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JG001786" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JG001786</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Edburg, S. L., Hicke, J. A., Brooks, P. D., Pendall, E. G., Ewers, B. E.,
Norton, U., Gochis, D., Gutmann, E. D., and Meddens, A. J. H.: Cascading
impacts of bark beetle-caused tree mortality on coupled biogeophysical and
biogeochemical processes, Front. Ecol. Environ., 10, 416–424, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Erb, K.-H., Kastner, T., Plutzar, C., Bais, A. L. S., Carvalhais, N.,
Fetzel, T., Gingrich, S., Haberl, H., Lauk, C., Niedertscheider, M.,
Pongratz, J., Thurner, M., and Luyssaert, S.: Unexpectedly large impact of
forest management and grazing on global vegetation biomass, Nature, 553, 73–76, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25138" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25138</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
FATES Development Team: The Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES) (Version sci.1.35.5_api.11.0.0), Zenodo, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3825474" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3825474</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Feldpausch, T. R., Jirka, S., Passos, C. A. M., Jasper, F., and Riha, S. J.:
When big trees fall: Damage and carbon export by reduced impact logging in
southern Amazonia, Forest Ecol. Manag., 219, 199–215,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.09.003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2005.09.003</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Figueira, A. M. E. S., Miller, S. D., de Sousa, C. A. D., Menton, M. C.,
Maia, A. R., da Rocha, H. R., and Goulden, M. L.: Effects of selective
logging on tropical forest tree growth, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, G00B05, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000577" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000577</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Fisher, R., McDowell, N., Purves, D., Moorcroft, P., Sitch, S., Cox, P.,
Huntingford, C., Meir, P., and Ian Woodward, F.: Assessing uncertainties in
a second-generation dynamic vegetation model caused by ecological scale
limitations, New Phytol., 187, 666–681,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03340.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03340.x</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Fisher R. A., Williams, M., Lola da Costa, A., Malhi, Y., da Costa, R. F., Almeida, S., and Meir, P.: The response of an Eastern Amazonian rain forest to drought stress: Results and modeling analyses from a through-fall exclusion experiment, Glob. Change Biol., 13, 2361–2378, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Fisher R. A., Williams M., Ruivo M. L., Sombroek W. G., and Lola da Costa, A.: Evaluating climatic and edaphic controls of drought stress at two Amazonian rain forest sites, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 148, 850–861, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Fisher, R. A., Muszala, S., Verteinstein, M., Lawrence, P., Xu, C., McDowell, N. G., Knox, R. G., Koven, C., Holm, J., Rogers, B. M., Spessa, A., Lawrence, D., and Bonan, G.: Taking off the training wheels: the properties of a dynamic vegetation model without climate envelopes, CLM4.5(ED), Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3593–3619, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3593-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3593-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Anderegg, W. R. L., Christoffersen, B. O.,
Dietze, M. C., Farrior, C. E., Holm, J. A., Hurtt, G. C., Knox, R. G.,
Lawrence, P. J., Lichstein, J. W., Longo, M., Matheny, A. M., Medvigy, D.,
Muller-Landau, H. C., Powell, T. L., Serbin, S. P., Sato, H., Shuman, J. K.,
Smith, B., Trugman, A. T., Viskari, T., Verbeeck, H., Weng, E., Xu, C., Xu,
X., Zhang, T., and Moorcroft, P. R.: Vegetation demographics in Earth System
Models: A review of progress and priorities, Glob. Change Biol., 24, 35–54, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13910" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13910</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Foken, T.: THE ENERGY BALANCE CLOSURE PROBLEM: AN OVERVIEW, Ecol.
Appl., 18, 1351–1367, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/06-0922.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/06-0922.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Goulden, M.: FLUXNET2015 BR-Sa3 Santarem-Km83-Logged Forest, Dataset, <a href="https://doi.org/10.18140/FLX/1440033" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.18140/FLX/1440033</a>, 2000–2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Goulden, M. L., Miller, S. D., da Rocha, H. R., Menton, M. C., de Freitas,
H. C., e Silva Figueira, A. M., and de Sousa, C. A. D.: DIEL AND SEASONAL PATTERNS OF TROPICAL FOREST CO<sub>2</sub> EXCHANGE, Ecol. Appl., 14,
42–54, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/02-6008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/02-6008</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Goulden, M. L., Miller, S. D., and da Rocha, H. R.: LBA-ECO CD-04 Soil
Moisture Data, km 83 Tower Site, Tapajos National Forest, Brazil. ORNL DAAC,
Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/979" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/979</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Hayek, M. N., Wehr, R., Longo, M., Hutyra, L. R., Wiedemann, K., Munger, J.
W., Bonal, D., Saleska, S. R., Fitzjarrald, D. R., and Wofsy, S. C.: A novel
correction for biases in forest eddy covariance carbon balance, Agr.
Forest Meteorol., 250–251, 90–101,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.12.186" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.12.186</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, M.: Script Repository for the FATES Logging Manuscript, GitHub, available at: <a href="https://github.com/huangmy/FATES_Logging_Manuscript.git" target="_blank"/> (last access: 28 June 2020), 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, M. and Asner, G. P.: Long-term carbon loss and recovery following
selective logging in Amazon forests, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 24,
GB3028, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GB003727" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GB003727</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, M., Asner, G. P., Keller, M., and Berry, J. A.: An ecosystem model
for tropical forest disturbance and selective logging, J.
Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 113, G01002, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000438" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000438</a>,
2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Hurtt, G. C., Moorcroft, P. R., And, S. W. P., and Levin, S. A.: Terrestrial
models and global change: challenges for the future, Glob. Change Biol.,
4, 581–590, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.t01-1-00203.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.t01-1-00203.x</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Hurtt, G. C., Chini, L. P., Frolking, S., Betts, R. A., Feddema, J.,
Fischer, G., Fisk, J. P., Hibbard, K., Houghton, R. A., Janetos, A., Jones,
C. D., Kindermann, G., Kinoshita, T., Klein Goldewijk, K., Riahi, K.,
Shevliakova, E., Smith, S., Stehfest, E., Thomson, A., Thornton, P., van
Vuuren, D. P., and Wang, Y. P.: Harmonization of land-use scenarios for the
period 1500–2100: 600 years of global gridded annual land-use transitions,
wood harvest, and resulting secondary lands, Climatic Change, 109, 117–161,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0153-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0153-2</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Keller, M., Palace, M., and Hurtt, G.: Biomass estimation in the Tapajos
National Forest, Brazil: Examination of sampling and allometric
uncertainties, Forest Ecol. Manag., 154, 371–382,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00509-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00509-6</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Keller, M., Alencar, A., Asner, G. P., Braswell, B., Bustamante, M.,
Davidson, E., Feldpausch, T., Fernandes, E., Goulden, M., Kabat, P., Kruijt,
B., Luizão, F., Miller, S., Markewitz, D., Nobre, A. D., Nobre, C. A.,
Priante Filho, N., da Rocha, H., Silva Dias, P., von Randow, C., and
Vourlitis, G. L.: ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN THE LARGE-SCALE BIOSPHERE–ATMOSPHERE EXPERIMENT IN AMAZONIA: EARLY RESULTS, Ecol. Appl.,
14, 3–16, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/03-6003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/03-6003</a>, 2004a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Keller, M., Palace, M., Asner, G. P., Pereira, R., and Silva, J. N. M.:
Coarse woody debris in undisturbed and logged forests in the eastern
Brazilian Amazon, Glob. Change Biol., 10, 784–795,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00770.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-8817.2003.00770.x</a>, 2004b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Koven, C. D., Knox, R. G., Fisher, R. A., Chambers, J. Q., Christoffersen, B. O., Davies, S. J., Detto, M., Dietze, M. C., Faybishenko, B., Holm, J., Huang, M., Kovenock, M., Kueppers, L. M., Lemieux, G., Massoud, E., McDowell, N. G., Muller-Landau, H. C., Needham, J. F., Norby, R. J., Powell, T., Rogers, A., Serbin, S. P., Shuman, J. K., Swann, A. L. S., Varadharajan, C., Walker, A. P., Wright, S. J., and Xu, C.: Benchmarking and parameter sensitivity of physiological and vegetation dynamics using the Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES) at Barro Colorado Island, Panama, Biogeosciences, 17, 3017–3044, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-3017-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-3017-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Lawrence, P. J., Feddema, J. J., Bonan, G. B., Meehl, G. A., O'Neill, B. C.,
Oleson, K. W., Levis, S., Lawrence, D. M., Kluzek, E., Lindsay, K., and
Thornton, P. E.: Simulating the Biogeochemical and Biogeophysical Impacts of
Transient Land Cover Change and Wood Harvest in the Community Climate System
Model (CCSM4) from 1850 to 2100, J. Climate, 25, 3071–3095,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00256.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00256.1</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Longo, M., Knox, R. G., Levine, N. M., Alves, L. F., Bonal, D., Camargo, P. B., Fitzjarrald, D. R., Hayek, M. N., Restrepo-Coupe, N., Saleska, S. R., da
Silva, R., Stark, S. C., Tapaj ìos, R. P., Wiedemann, K. T., Zhang, K., Wofsy, S. C., and Moorcroft, P. R.: Ecosystem heterogeneity and diversity mitigate Amazon
forest resilience to frequent extreme droughts, New Phytol.,
219, 914–931, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/nph" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/nph</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Longo, M., Knox, R. G., Levine, N. M., Swann, A. L. S., Medvigy, D. M., Dietze, M. C., Kim, Y., Zhang, K., Bonal, D., Burban, B., Camargo, P. B., Hayek, M. N., Saleska, S. R., da Silva, R., Bras, R. L., Wofsy, S. C., and Moorcroft, P. R.: The biophysics, ecology, and biogeochemistry of functionally diverse, vertically and horizontally heterogeneous ecosystems: the Ecosystem Demography model, version 2.2 – Part 2: Model evaluation for tropical South America, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4347–4374, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4347-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4347-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Luyssaert, S., Schulze, E. D., Borner, A., Knohl, A., Hessenmoller, D., Law,
B. E., Ciais, P., and Grace, J.: Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks,
Nature, 455, 213–215, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07276" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07276</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Macpherson, A. J., Carter, D. R., Schulze, M. D., Vidal, E., and Lentini, M.
W.: The sustainability of timber production from Eastern Amazonian forests,
Land Use Policy, 29, 339–350,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.07.004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.07.004</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Martínez-Ramos, M., Ortiz-Rodríguez, I. A., Piñero, D., Dirzo,
R., and Sarukhán, J.: Anthropogenic disturbances jeopardize biodiversity
conservation within tropical rainforest reserves, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 5323–5328, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1602893113" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1602893113</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Massoud, E. C., Xu, C., Fisher, R. A., Knox, R. G., Walker, A. P., Serbin, S. P., Christoffersen, B. O., Holm, J. A., Kueppers, L. M., Ricciuto, D. M., Wei, L., Johnson, D. J., Chambers, J. Q., Koven, C. D., McDowell, N. G., and Vrugt, J. A.: Identification of key parameters controlling demographically structured vegetation dynamics in a land surface model: CLM4.5(FATES), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4133–4164, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4133-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4133-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Mazzei, L., Sist, P., Ruschel, A., Putz, F. E., Marco, P., Pena, W., and
Ferreira, J. E. R.: Above-ground biomass dynamics after reduced-impact
logging in the Eastern Amazon, Forest Ecol. Manag., 259, 367–373,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.10.031" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.10.031</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Menton, M. C., Figueira, A. M. S., de Sousa, C. A. D., Miller, S. D., da Rocha, H. R., and Goulden, M. L.: LBA-ECO CD-04 Biomass Survey, km 83 Tower Site, Tapajos National Forest, Brazil. ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/990" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/990</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Miller, S. D., Goulden, M. L., Menton, M. C., da Rocha, H. R., de Freitas,
H. C., Figueira, A. M. e. S., and Dias de Sousa, C. A.: BIOMETRIC AND
MICROMETEOROLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS OF TROPICAL FOREST CARBON BALANCE,
Ecol. Appl., 14, 114–126, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/02-6005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/02-6005</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Miller, S. D., Goulden, M. L., Hutyra, L. R., Keller, M., Saleska, S. R.,
Wofsy, S. C., Figueira, A. M. S., da Rocha, H. R., and de Camargo, P. B.:
Reduced impact logging minimally alters tropical rainforest carbon and
energy exchange, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 108, 19431–19435, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1105068108" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1105068108</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Moorcroft, P. R., Hurtt, G. C., and Pacala, S. W.: A METHOD FOR SCALING
VEGETATION DYNAMICS: THE ECOSYSTEM DEMOGRAPHY MODEL (ED), Ecol.
Monogr., 71, 557–586, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9615(2001)071[0557:AMFSVD]2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9615(2001)071[0557:AMFSVD]2.0.CO;2</a>,
2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Nepstad, D. C., Verssimo, A., Alencar, A., Nobre, C., Lima, E., Lefebvre,
P., Schlesinger, P., Potter, C., Moutinho, P., Mendoza, E., Cochrane, M.,
and Brooks, V.: Large-scale impoverishment of Amazonian forests by logging
and fire, Nature, 398, 505–508, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Oleson, K. W., Lawrence, D. M., Bonan, G. B., Drewniak, B., Huang, M.,
Koven, C. D., Levis, S., Li, F., Riley, W. J., Subin, Z. M., Swenson, S. C.,
Thornton, P. E., Bozbiyik, A., Fisher, R., Kluzek, E., Lamarque, J.-F.,
Lawrence, P. J., Leung, L. R., Lipscomb, W., Muszala, S., Ricciuto, D. M.,
Sacks, W., Sun, Y., Tang, J., and Yang, Z.-L.: Technical Description of
version 4.5 of the Community Land Model (CLM), National Center for
Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CONcar Technical Note NCAR/TN-503+STR,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Palace, M., Keller, M., and Silva, H.: NECROMASS PRODUCTION: STUDIES IN
UNDISTURBED AND LOGGED AMAZON FORESTS, Ecol. Appl., 18, 873–884,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/06-2022.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/06-2022.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Pan, Y., Birdsey, R. A., Fang, J., Houghton, R., Kauppi, P. E., Kurz, W. A.,
Phillips, O. L., Shvidenko, A., Lewis, S. L., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P.,
Jackson, R. B., Pacala, S. W., McGuire, A. D., Piao, S., Rautiainen, A.,
Sitch, S., and Hayes, D.: A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World's
Forests, Science, 333, 988–993, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Pearson, T., Brown, S., and Casarim, F.: Carbon emissions from tropical
forest degradation caused by logging, Environ. Res. Lett., 9,
034017, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/3/034017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/3/034017</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Pereira Jr., R., Zweede, J., Asner, G. P., and Keller, M.: Forest canopy
damage and recovery in reduced-impact and conventional selective logging in
eastern Para, Brazil, Forest Ecol. Manag., 168, 77–89,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00732-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00732-0</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Piponiot, C., Derroire, G., Descroix, L., Mazzei, L., Rutishauser, E., Sist, P., and Hérault, B.: Assessing timber volume recovery after disturbance in
tropical forests – a new modelling framework, Ecol. Model., 384, 353–369,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.05.023" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.05.023</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Powell, T. L., Galbraith, D. R., Christoffersen, B. O., Harper, A., Imbuzeiro,
H. M., Rowland, L., Almeida, S., Brando, P. M., da Costa, A. C. L., Costa, M. H., and Levine, N. M.: Confronting model predictions of carbon fluxes with
measurements of Amazon forests subjected to experimental drought, New
Phytol., 200, 350–365, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Putz, F. E., Sist, P., Fredericksen, T., and Dykstra, D.: Reduced-impact
logging: Challenges and opportunities, Forest Ecol. Manag., 256,
1427–1433, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.03.036" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.03.036</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Reich, P. B: The world‐wide `fast–slow' plant economics spectrum: a traits manifesto, J. Ecol., 102, 275–301,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12211" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12211</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Rice, A. H., Pyle, E. H., Saleska, S. R., Hutyra, L., Palace, M., Keller,
M., de Camargo, P. B., Portilho, K., Marques, D. F., and Wofsy, S. C.:
CARBON BALANCE AND VEGETATION DYNAMICS IN AN OLD-GROWTH AMAZONIAN FOREST,
Ecol. Appl., 14, 55–71, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/02-6006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/02-6006</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Saleska, S.: FLUXNET2015 BR-Sa1 Santarem-Km67-Primary Forest, Dataset, <a href="https://doi.org/10.18140/FLX/1440032" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.18140/FLX/1440032</a>, 2002–2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Saleska, S. R., Miller, S. D., Matross, D. M., Goulden, M. L., Wofsy, S. C., da Rocha, H. R., de Camargo, P. B., Crill, P., Daube, B. C., de Freitas, H. C., Hutyra, L., Keller, M., Kirchhoff, V., Menton, M., Munger, J. W., Pyle, E. H., Rice, A. H., and Silva, H.: Carbon in Amazon Forests: Unexpected Seasonal Fluxes
and Disturbance-Induced Losses, Science, 302, 1554–1557, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1091165" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1091165</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Saleska, S. R., da Rocha, H. R., Huete, A. R., Nobre, A.D., Artaxo, P., and
Shimabukuro, Y. E.: LBA-ECO CD-32 Flux Tower Network Data Compilation,
Brazilian Amazon: 1999–2006, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Distributed Active Archive Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1174" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1174</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Sato, H., Itoh, A., and Kohyama, T.: SEIB–DGVM: A new Dynamic Global
Vegetation Model using a spatially explicit individual-based approach,
Ecol. Model., 200, 279–307,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.09.006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.09.006</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Shevliakova, E., Pacala, S. W., Malyshev, S., Hurtt, G. C., Milly, P. C. D.,
Caspersen, J. P., Sentman, L. T., Fisk, J. P., Wirth, C., and Crevoisier, C.:
Carbon cycling under 300 years of land use change: Importance of the
secondary vegetation sink, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 23, GB2022,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GB003176" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GB003176</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Silver, W. L., Neff, J., McGroddy, M., Veldkamp, E., Keller, M., and Cosme,
R.: Effects of Soil Texture on Belowground Carbon and Nutrient Storage in a
Lowland Amazonian Forest Ecosystem, Ecosystems, 3, 193–209, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s100210000019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s100210000019</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Sist, P., Rutishauser, E., Peña-Claros, M., Shenkin, A., Hérault,
B., Blanc, L., Baraloto, C., Baya, F., Benedet, F., da Silva, K. E.,
Descroix, L., Ferreira, J. N., Gourlet-Fleury, S., Guedes, M. C., Bin Harun,
I., Jalonen, R., Kanashiro, M., Krisnawati, H., Kshatriya, M., Lincoln, P.,
Mazzei, L., Medjibé, V., Nasi, R., d'Oliveira, M. V. N., de Oliveira, L.
C., Picard, N., Pietsch, S., Pinard, M., Priyadi, H., Putz, F. E., Rodney,
K., Rossi, V., Roopsind, A., Ruschel, A. R., Shari, N. H. Z., Rodrigues de
Souza, C., Susanty, F. H., Sotta, E. D., Toledo, M., Vidal, E., West, T. A.
P., Wortel, V., and Yamada, T.: The Tropical managed Forests Observatory: a
research network addressing the future of tropical logged forests, Appl.
Veg. Sci., 18, 171–174, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12125" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/avsc.12125</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Smith, B., Prentice, I. C., and Sykes, M. T.: Representation of vegetation
dynamics in the modelling of terrestrial ecosystems: comparing two
contrasting approaches within European climate space, Global Ecol.
Biogeogr., 10, 621–637, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1466-822X.2001.t01-1-00256.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1466-822X.2001.t01-1-00256.x</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>
Smith, B., Wårlind, D., Arneth, A., Hickler, T., Leadley, P., Siltberg, J., and Zaehle, S.: Implications of incorporating N cycling and N limitations on primary production in an individual-based dynamic vegetation model, Biogeosciences, 11, 2027–2054, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2027-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-2027-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>
Strigul, N., Pristinski, D., Purves, D., Dushoff, J., and Pacala, S.:
SCALING FROM TREES TO FORESTS: TRACTABLE MACROSCOPIC EQUATIONS FOR FOREST
DYNAMICS, Ecol. Monogr., 78, 523–545, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/08-0082.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1890/08-0082.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><mixed-citation>
Thonicke, K., Spessa, A., Prentice, I. C., Harrison, S. P., Dong, L., and Carmona-Moreno, C.: The influence of vegetation, fire spread and fire behaviour on biomass burning and trace gas emissions: results from a process-based model, Biogeosciences, 7, 1991–2011, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-1991-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-1991-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><mixed-citation>
Tomasella, J. and Hodnett, M. G.: Estimating soil water retention
characteristics from limited data in Brazilian Amazonia, Soil Sci.,
163, 190–202, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><mixed-citation>
Trumbore, S. and Barbosa De Camargo, P.: Soil carbon dynamics, Amazonia and
global change, American Geophysical Union, Washington DC, 451–462, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><mixed-citation>
Watanabe, S., Hajima, T., Sudo, K., Nagashima, T., Takemura, T., Okajima,
H., Nozawa, T., Kawase, H., Abe, M., Yokohata, T., Ise, T., Sato, H., Kato,
E., Takata, K., Emori, S., and Kawamiya, M.: MIROC-ESM 2010: model
description and basic results of CMIP5-20c3m experiments, Geosci. Model
Dev., 4, 845–872, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-845-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-845-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><mixed-citation>
Weng, E. S., Malyshev, S., Lichstein, J. W., Farrior, C. E., Dybzinski, R., Zhang, T., Shevliakova, E., and Pacala, S. W.: Scaling from individual trees to forests in an Earth system modeling framework using a mathematically tractable model of height-structured competition, Biogeosciences, 12, 2655–2694, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-2655-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-2655-2015</a>, 2015.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><mixed-citation>
Whitmore, T. C.: An Introduction to Tropical Rain Forests, Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, USA, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><mixed-citation>
Wilson, K., Goldstein, A., Falge, E., Aubinet, M., Baldocchi, D., Berbigier,
P., Bernhofer, C., Ceulemans, R., Dolman, H., Field, C., Grelle, A., Ibrom,
A., Law, B. E., Kowalski, A., Meyers, T., Moncrieff, J., Monson, R., Oechel,
W., Tenhunen, J., Valentini, R., and Verma, S.: Energy balance closure at
FLUXNET sites, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 113, 223–243,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(02)00109-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(02)00109-0</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><mixed-citation>
Wright, I. J., Reich, P. B., Westoby, M., and Ackerly, D. D.: The worldwide
leaf economics spectrum, Nature, 428, 821–827,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02403" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02403</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, J., Albert, L. P., Lopes, A. P., Restrepo-Coupe, N., Hayek, M., Wiedemann,
K. T., Guan, K., Stark, S. C., Christoffersen, B., Prohaska, N., and Tavares,
J. V.: Leaf development and demography explain photosynthetic
seasonality in Amazon evergreen forests, Science, 351, 972–976, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, J., Guan, K., Hayek, M., Restrepo-Coupe, N., Wiedemann, K. T., Xu, X., Wehr, R., Christoffersen, B. O., Miao, G., da Silva, R., de Araujo, A. C., Oliviera, R. C., Camargo, P. B., Monson, R. K., Huete, A. R., and Saleska, S. R.: Partitioning controls on
Amazon forest photosynthesis between environmental and biotic factors at
hourly to interannual timescales, Glob. Change Biol., 23, 1240–1257,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13509" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13509</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
