skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Ellis, Erle C"

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Societal Impact StatementForest ecosystems absorb and store about 25% of global carbon dioxide emissions annually and are increasingly shaped by human land use and management. Climate change interacts with land use and forest dynamics to influence observed carbon stocks and the strength of the land carbon sink. We show that climate change effects on modeled forest land carbon stocks are strongest in tropical wildlands that have limited human influence. Global forest carbon stocks and carbon sink strength may decline as climate change and anthropogenic influences intensify, with wildland tropical forests, especially in Amazonia, likely being especially vulnerable. SummaryHuman effects on ecosystems date back thousands of years, and anthropogenic biomes—anthromes—broadly incorporate the effects of human population density and land use on ecosystems. Forests are integral to the global carbon cycle, containing large biomass carbon stocks, yet their responses to land use and climate change are uncertain but critical to informing climate change mitigation strategies, ecosystem management, and Earth system modeling.Using an anthromes perspective and the site locations from the Global Forest Carbon (ForC) Database, we compare intensively used, cultured, and wildland forest lands in tropical and extratropical regions. We summarize recent past (1900‐present) patterns of land use intensification, and we use a feedback analysis of Earth system models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 to estimate the sensitivity of forest carbon stocks to CO2and temperature change for different anthromes among regions.Modeled global forest carbon stock responses are positive for CO2increase but neutral to negative for temperature increase. Across anthromes (intensively used, cultured, and wildland forest areas), modeled forest carbon stock responses of temperate and boreal forests are less variable than those of tropical forests. Tropical wildland forest areas appear especially sensitive to CO2and temperature change, with the negative temperature response highlighting the potential vulnerability of the globally significant carbon stock in tropical forests.The net effect of anthropogenic activities—including land‐use intensification and environmental change and their interactions with natural forest dynamics—will shape future forest carbon stock changes. These interactive effects will likely be strongest in tropical wildlands. 
    more » « less
    Free, publicly-accessible full text available July 1, 2026
  2. null (Ed.)
    Archaeological and paleoecological evidence shows that by 10,000 BCE, all human societies employed varying degrees of ecologically transformative land use practices, including burning, hunting, species propagation, domestication, cultivation, and others that have left long-term legacies across the terrestrial biosphere. Yet, a lingering paradigm among natural scientists, conservationists, and policymakers is that human transformation of terrestrial nature is mostly recent and inherently destructive. Here, we use the most up-to-date, spatially explicit global reconstruction of historical human populations and land use to show that this paradigm is likely wrong. Even 12,000 y ago, nearly three quarters of Earth’s land was inhabited and therefore shaped by human societies, including more than 95% of temperate and 90% of tropical woodlands. Lands now characterized as “natural,” “intact,” and “wild” generally exhibit long histories of use, as do protected areas and Indigenous lands, and current global patterns of vertebrate species richness and key biodiversity areas are more strongly associated with past patterns of land use than with present ones in regional landscapes now characterized as natural. The current biodiversity crisis can seldom be explained by the loss of uninhabited wildlands, resulting instead from the appropriation, colonization, and intensifying use of the biodiverse cultural landscapes long shaped and sustained by prior societies. Recognizing this deep cultural connection with biodiversity will therefore be essential to resolve the crisis. 
    more » « less
  3. Abstract One mechanism proposed to explain high species diversity in tropical systems is strong negative conspecific density dependence (CDD), which reduces recruitment of juveniles in proximity to conspecific adult plants. Although evidence shows that plant-specific soil pathogens can drive negative CDD, trees also form key mutualisms with mycorrhizal fungi, which may counteract these effects. Across 43 large-scale forest plots worldwide, we tested whether ectomycorrhizal tree species exhibit weaker negative CDD than arbuscular mycorrhizal tree species. We further tested for conmycorrhizal density dependence (CMDD) to test for benefit from shared mutualists. We found that the strength of CDD varies systematically with mycorrhizal type, with ectomycorrhizal tree species exhibiting higher sapling densities with increasing adult densities than arbuscular mycorrhizal tree species. Moreover, we found evidence of positive CMDD for tree species of both mycorrhizal types. Collectively, these findings indicate that mycorrhizal interactions likely play a foundational role in global forest diversity patterns and structure. 
    more » « less
  4. null (Ed.)