This Week's Letters

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science  14 Feb 2003:
Vol. 299, Issue 5609, pp. 1013
DOI: 10.1126/science.299.5609.1013a

Letters in This Issue

Caution in China over GM Crops

Chen Niu

More on the Animal Rights Debate

Crystal Miller-Spiegel. Response Steven L. Teitelbaum

Cerebral Hemorrhage and Amyloid-

Craig S. Atwood, George Perry, Mark A. Smith. Response M. Pfeifer, S. Boncristiano, L. Bondolfi, A. Stalder, T. Deller, M. Staufenbiel, P. M. Mathews, M. Jucker

Corrections and Clarifications

Technical Comment Abstracts

Technical Comment Abstracts

Comment on “Determination of Deforestation Rates of the World's Humid Tropical Forests”

Phillip M. Fearnside and William F. Laurance

Abstract: Achard et al. (Reports, 9 Aug. 2002, p. 999) estimated tropical deforestation and atmospheric carbon emissions from 1990 to 1997 and concluded that both were substantially lower than found in previous studies. However, we assert that they markedly underestimated carbon emissions by omitting key factors and making some invalid assumptions. The net effect is a potentially large underestimate of the impact of tropical deforestation on global warming.

Full text at www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/299/5609/1015a

Response to Comment on “Determination of Deforestation Rates of the World's Humid Tropical Forests”

Hugh D. Eva, Frédéric Achard, Hans-Jürgen Stibig, Philippe Mayaux

Abstract: The contribution of our work to the issue of the global carbon budget relates to the true level of humid tropical deforestation, not to the amount of forest biomass. By applying our deforestation findings to refereed data on biomass, we produced improved estimates of net carbon emissions, which are supported by recent, independent observations of atmospheric CO2 emissions over Southeast Asia.

Full text at http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/299/5609/www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/299/5609/1015b

Navigate This Article