In the Amazon rainforest, land use following deforestation is diverse and dynamic. Mounting evidence indicates that the climatic impacts of forest loss can also vary considerably, depending on specific features of the affected areas. The size of the deforested patches, for instance, was shown to modulate the characteristics of local climatic impacts. Nonetheless, the influence of different types of land use and management strategies on the magnitude of local climatic changes remains uncertain. Here, we evaluated the impacts of large-scale commodity farming and rural settlements on surface temperature, rainfall patterns, and energy fluxes. Our results reveal that changes in land–atmosphere coupling are induced not only by deforestation size but also, by land use type and management patterns inside the deforested areas. We provide evidence that, in comparison with rural settlements, deforestation caused by large-scale commodity agriculture is more likely to reduce convective rainfall and increase land surface temperature. We demonstrate that these differences are mainly caused by a more intensive management of the land, resulting in significantly lower vegetation cover throughout the year, which reduces latent heat flux. Our findings indicate an urgent need for alternative agricultural practices, as well as forest restoration, for maintaining ecosystem processes and mitigating change in the local climates across the Amazon basin.During the past 50 y, ∼20% of the Amazon forest has been lost to deforestation (
1,
2). These changes in the land surface have affected the functioning of ecosystems and the climate in ways we are only starting to understand. Deforestation size, for instance, is a potential factor defining the magnitude and characteristics of changes in local climate associated with forest loss (
3,
4). There is also evidence that the different land uses that follow deforestation can regulate the magnitude of changes in surface energy balance and water cycle (
5). Historically, there has been large variation in the characteristics and causes of deforestation (
1,
6–
9). In the area known as the “arc of deforestation,” two major processes have contributed to forest loss: government-supported rural settlements and expansion of market-focused large-scale agriculture (hereinafter referred to as “commodity agriculture”) (
10,
11). Deforestation caused by these two types of farming systems has distinct characteristics, and each can have several variants.Rural settlements are generally associated with government colonization projects, migratory flow incentives, and the construction of new roads (
7). In areas dominated by rural settlements, small properties with plots ranging from 25 to 100 ha are predominant (
8,
9,
12). However, medium-sized properties ranging from 250 to 1,000 ha and farms larger than 1,000 ha may also occur. Activities inside these areas are characterized by livestock production (extensive pastures), small-scale crop production, and family farming (
13). The establishment of small farms along main highways and secondary roads results in the well-known “fish bone” deforestation pattern.Forest areas taken by large-scale commodity agriculture represent a more recent stage of occupation, usually associated with spontaneous and economical migration but also, with changes in land use policies and market conditions (
14). Agricultural activities aimed at commodity crop plantation are in general productive and often technologically advanced. The most common commodity crops in the Amazon region are soybean, maize, sorghum, and cotton. Nonetheless, forests are typically not converted directly into croplands, with pastures often used as a transitory land use. Permanent mid- to large-scale cattle ranching also occurs, although many of these areas are being rapidly converted into croplands (
6,
14–
16). Farm sizes can reach several thousand hectares. Properties are, therefore, bigger and more isolated, in comparison with rural settlements (
13).Given the different characteristics of commodity agriculture and rural settlements, the spatiotemporal patterns of land cover biophysical properties can also differ considerably. In general, commodity crops cultivation involves an intensive use of the land, sometimes with two or more harvests per year (
17). Hence, rapid changes in the vegetation cover, albedo, and evapotranspiration (ET) can occur (
5,
18). On the other hand, in areas where small-scale pastures and agriculture are prevalent, the biophysical properties of the land surface are expected to vary less, given the less intensive use of the land (e.g., associated with family farming and agroforestry). Furthermore, modeling studies suggest that the type of vegetation involved in land cover conversions is important in determining the sign of the land change impacts (
19). However, empirical studies are crucially needed to better understand how different land uses across the Amazon region affect the local and regional climate.Tropical deforestation has deep impacts on biophysical processes (
1,
20–
22), contributing to amplifying diurnal temperature variability (1.95 ± 0.08 °C) as well as increasing mean air temperature (∼1 °C) (
23). The causes of increase in temperature are dominated by nonradiative mechanisms, in particular a decrease in latent heat flux (LE) (
24). The cooling effects of albedo increase due to deforestation are in most cases outweighed by the warming effects of decreasing ET, leading to net warming (
23–
25).The impacts of Amazon deforestation on rainfall patterns are not yet fully understood (
4). In the initial phases of deforestation, vegetation loss was shown to increase regional cloudiness and precipitation (
3). In comparison with deforested areas, the greater humidity over forests leads to more convective available potential energy, which makes the atmospheric boundary layer more unstable (
26). Conversely, small deforestation patches showed more active shallow convection, explaining the higher frequency of shallow clouds over deforested areas (
26). However, it is unclear how these mechanisms change as deforested areas increase and land cover becomes more uniform. One hypothesis is that convective lifting mechanisms will lose force, and shallow clouds over deforested areas will no longer be favored. Modeling studies indicate that this shift is already happening in some parts of the Amazon, where deforestation has reached a point in which thermally dominated regime has declined, leading to a more dynamically driven hydroclimatic regime (
27). A dynamically driven regime becomes dominant when differences in surface roughness between forest and forest clearings start to play a larger role in the atmospheric response, in comparison with the differences in the surface energy partitioning (
28).As observational and modeling studies indicate that land use and management can play an important role in the climate system, overlooking these landscape heterogeneities can hinder an adequate response to the threats posed by human activities (
29). Clarifying the climatic impacts of different land uses in the Amazon is crucial to foster informed plans for sustainable land management, in particular those aiming at strategies for climate change mitigation, maintenance of ecological functioning, and guarantying provision of essential ecosystem services. Here, we hypothesize that forest conversion to large-scale commodity agriculture is more detrimental to local climate than conversion to rural settlements. To test this hypothesis, we first evaluated whether or not land uses associated with commodity agriculture and rural settlements lead to quantitatively distinguishable land cover spatiotemporal patterns in regions with similar deforestation rates (1985 to 2018) and total deforested area in 2018. Next, we collected empirical evidence on how forest clearing associated with these two causes has affected local rainfall, surface temperature, and LE.
相似文献