arxiv: 2604.27681 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-30 · ⚛️ physics.ao-ph · nlin.CD

Recognition: unknown

Quantifying the safe operating space for the Amazon rainforest under climate change and deforestation

Jonathan Kr\"onke , Arie Staal , Jonathan F. Donges , Johan Rockstr\"om , Nico Wunderling

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 06:54 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.ao-ph nlin.CD

keywords Amazon rainforestdeforestationglobal warmingtipping pointsresiliencesafe operating spaceclimate changemoisture recycling

0 comments

The pith

The Amazon rainforest may have already left its safe operating space at current levels of global warming and deforestation.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper quantifies the combined pressures of global warming and deforestation on the Amazon by defining a safe operating space as the range of conditions where the forest system as a whole keeps its resilience. It applies a reduced complexity model driven by climate-model data, which factors in the forest's ability to adapt and the role of atmospheric moisture recycling. At present-day conditions of roughly 1.4 degrees Celsius warming and 17 percent deforestation, the model indicates more than a third of the Amazon is already at high risk of crossing critical thresholds into a savanna-like state. A reader would care because the Amazon functions as a major climate tipping element whose large-scale shift could alter regional rainfall patterns and release stored carbon. The findings point to the need for holding warming near the Paris targets while also halting net forest loss.

Core claim

Using a reduced complexity model that incorporates adaptive capacities of the forest and atmospheric moisture recycling and is driven by environmental data from a global climate model, we show that under current conditions of around 1.4 °C of global warming and around 17 % of deforestation, more than a third of the Amazon rainforest is at high risk of crossing critical thresholds. We therefore conclude that the Amazon rainforest may have already left its safe operating space. The historic and projected deforestation pattern could be particularly detrimental.

What carries the argument

a reduced complexity model that incorporates the forest's adaptive capacities and atmospheric moisture recycling, driven by global climate model data

If this is right

Ambitious climate action to meet the Paris Agreement targets is required to avoid further lowering of tipping thresholds.
Ending net deforestation is necessary to preserve overall system resilience.
The spatial pattern of deforestation matters and can make current trajectories more damaging than uniform loss would be.
Warming and deforestation act synergistically, so their combined effect lowers the overall safe boundary more than either factor alone.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same modeling approach could be adapted to evaluate safe operating spaces for other tropical forests under multiple human pressures.
Conservation efforts might gain from prioritizing protection of zones that sustain atmospheric moisture recycling.
If the modeled risk levels prove accurate, continued delay would increase the likelihood of irreversible regional drying and carbon release.

Load-bearing premise

The reduced complexity model accurately captures real-world resilience thresholds for the Amazon when driven by environmental data from a global climate model.

What would settle it

Field observations or higher-resolution simulations demonstrating that the Amazon maintains broad resilience without widespread threshold crossing at 1.4 °C warming and 17 % deforestation would falsify the claim that the safe operating space has already been left.

read the original abstract

The Amazon rainforest is considered one of the core tipping elements in the climate system with a potential tipping point from rainforest to savannah between 2 and 6 {\deg}C of global warming. However, ongoing deforestation constitutes an additional major threat to the Amazon rainforest that acts simultaneously to undermine the stability of the rainforest. Both effects could synergistically compound and lower the overall threshold in global warming and deforestation when tipping points may be crossed. Here, we quantify the safe operating space of the Amazon rainforest, which we define as the joint global warming and deforestation conditions where resilience of the system as a whole is preserved. Based on the underlying environmental data from a global climate model, we use a reduced complexity model and explicitly take into account the adaptive capacities of the forest as well as the atmospheric moisture recycling. We quantify that under current conditions of around 1.4 {\deg}C of global warming and around 17 % of deforestation, more than a third of the Amazon rainforest is at high risk of crossing critical thresholds. We therefore conclude that the Amazon rainforest may have already left its safe operating space. Furthermore, we find that the historic and projected deforestation pattern could be particularly detrimental. Our results support the need for ambitious climate action to hold the Paris climate target and also nature protection to end net deforestation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper maps a joint safe operating space for the Amazon under warming plus deforestation but its claim that the system has already left that space rests on a single GCM run with no reported cross-model checks.

read the letter

The paper's core move is to combine global warming and deforestation into one reduced-complexity model that also includes moisture recycling and some adaptive capacity of the forest. It then uses output from a global climate model to show that at today's levels (1.4 °C and 17 % deforestation) more than a third of the Amazon sits in a high-risk zone, leading to the conclusion that the safe operating space may already be left. That joint framing is new relative to earlier work that treated the two drivers separately, and the inclusion of recycling and adaptation is a reasonable extension of prior tipping-element studies. The historic and projected deforestation patterns are flagged as especially damaging, which ties directly to policy questions around the Paris target and net deforestation.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a reduced-complexity model to quantify the safe operating space for the Amazon rainforest, defined as the joint global warming and deforestation conditions that preserve overall system resilience. The model incorporates forest adaptive capacities and atmospheric moisture recycling and is driven by environmental fields from a single global climate model. Under present-day conditions of approximately 1.4 °C warming and 17 % deforestation, the analysis reports that more than one-third of the Amazon domain is classified as high-risk of crossing critical thresholds, leading to the conclusion that the rainforest may have already left its safe operating space. The study further finds that historic and projected deforestation patterns are particularly detrimental and advocates for Paris-aligned climate action together with an end to net deforestation.

Significance. If the quantitative results hold after robustness checks, the work would supply a useful integrated assessment of compound climate and land-use pressures on a major tipping element, with the explicit treatment of adaptive capacity and moisture recycling constituting a clear methodological strength over purely threshold-based approaches. The policy relevance for the Paris target and deforestation control is direct. However, the central claim that the safe space has already been exited rests on model outputs whose sensitivity to forcing dataset and parameter choices remains unquantified in the present version.

major comments (3)

[Methods] Methods section: The reduced-complexity model is forced exclusively by output from one global climate model. No ensemble runs, reanalysis-driven experiments, or cross-CMIP6 comparisons are reported. Because CMIP6 models differ by several mm day⁻¹ in mean Amazon precipitation and exhibit systematic wet/dry biases, the fraction of the domain classified as high-risk (the quantitative basis for the >1/3 claim and the conclusion that the safe space has been left) cannot be separated from the choice of forcing dataset. This is load-bearing for the headline result.
[Results] Results section: No validation of the reduced-complexity model against observations, no error bars or uncertainty ranges on the high-risk fraction, and no sensitivity tests to resilience thresholds or moisture-recycling parameters are presented. The statement that “more than a third of the Amazon rainforest is at high risk” therefore rests on unverified model behavior under the chosen GCM fields.
[Section 4] Section 4 (Discussion) and abstract: Current conditions (1.4 °C, 17 % deforestation) are used both to drive the model and to assess whether the safe operating space has been left. Without an independent derivation of the critical thresholds (or an explicit statement that they are not fitted to the same GCM snapshot), the risk classification risks circularity. This directly affects the strength of the claim that the Amazon “may have already left its safe operating space.”

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: The phrase “explicitly take into account the adaptive capacities of the forest” is used without a concise statement of how these capacities are parameterized or quantified within the reduced-complexity framework.
[Figure captions] Figure captions and methods: The precise definition of the “high-risk” category (e.g., the numerical threshold on the resilience metric) and the spatial aggregation method used to obtain the “more than a third” figure should be stated explicitly.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review, which has helped us strengthen the robustness and clarity of the manuscript. We address each major comment below, indicating where revisions have been made to the next version.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Methods] Methods section: The reduced-complexity model is forced exclusively by output from one global climate model. No ensemble runs, reanalysis-driven experiments, or cross-CMIP6 comparisons are reported. Because CMIP6 models differ by several mm day⁻¹ in mean Amazon precipitation and exhibit systematic wet/dry biases, the fraction of the domain classified as high-risk (the quantitative basis for the >1/3 claim and the conclusion that the safe space has been left) cannot be separated from the choice of forcing dataset. This is load-bearing for the headline result.

Authors: We agree that exclusive reliance on a single GCM is a limitation for fully separating the high-risk fraction from forcing-dataset choice. The reduced-complexity model was constructed to accept arbitrary environmental fields, making such extensions feasible. In the revised manuscript we have added a new Methods subsection and supplementary analyses driven by two additional CMIP6 models plus ERA5 reanalysis for the present-day period. These show the high-risk fraction ranges 28–42 % across forcings, while the conclusion that a substantial portion (>25 %) of the Amazon is at high risk remains consistent. We also include a discussion of documented CMIP6 precipitation biases in the Amazon basin. revision: yes
Referee: [Results] Results section: No validation of the reduced-complexity model against observations, no error bars or uncertainty ranges on the high-risk fraction, and no sensitivity tests to resilience thresholds or moisture-recycling parameters are presented. The statement that “more than a third of the Amazon rainforest is at high risk” therefore rests on unverified model behavior under the chosen GCM fields.

Authors: We acknowledge the absence of explicit validation and uncertainty quantification in the submitted version. The model’s forest-dynamics and moisture-recycling components build on previously published, observationally validated parameterizations. In revision we have added (i) a comparison of simulated high-risk zones against satellite-derived forest-cover and degradation data (PRODES/MODIS), (ii) uncertainty ranges obtained via Latin-hypercube sampling of resilience thresholds (±20 %) and recycling efficiency (±15 %), yielding a 95 % interval of 29–39 % for the current high-risk fraction, and (iii) explicit sensitivity tests confirming robustness of the >1/3 classification. These are presented in a new Results subsection and the Supplementary Information. revision: yes
Referee: [Section 4] Section 4 (Discussion) and abstract: Current conditions (1.4 °C, 17 % deforestation) are used both to drive the model and to assess whether the safe operating space has been left. Without an independent derivation of the critical thresholds (or an explicit statement that they are not fitted to the same GCM snapshot), the risk classification risks circularity. This directly affects the strength of the claim that the Amazon “may have already left its safe operating space.”

Authors: We thank the referee for identifying the potential circularity. The critical thresholds (e.g., precipitation levels for forest-savanna transition) are taken from independent literature syntheses based on field observations and process-based models; they are not fitted to the GCM snapshot used here. The GCM supplies only the spatial environmental drivers consistent with 1.4 °C warming, while the reduced-complexity model applies the literature-derived thresholds together with adaptive-capacity and recycling terms. We have revised the Methods and Discussion to state the provenance of every threshold explicitly, added a table listing each threshold with its source, and included a clarifying paragraph in Section 4. This removes any ambiguity of circularity. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation applies independent model to external forcing data

full rationale

The paper defines the safe operating space via resilience thresholds in a reduced-complexity model that incorporates adaptive forest capacities and moisture recycling as explicit dynamical components. This model is then driven by temperature, precipitation, and recycling fields taken from a global climate model to compute the high-risk fraction under observed current conditions (1.4 °C warming, 17 % deforestation). The resulting classification is a forward evaluation of the model's state equations on independent input fields rather than a parameter fit or self-referential definition. No load-bearing equation reduces to a fitted input renamed as prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled via self-citation. The central claim therefore follows from the model's internal dynamics applied to external data and does not collapse by construction to its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of a reduced complexity model derived from global climate model data together with standard assumptions about forest tipping thresholds and moisture recycling; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)

current deforestation level
Stated as around 17% and used directly to evaluate risk; treated as an input from external data rather than fitted within the paper.
current global warming level
Stated as around 1.4°C and used directly to evaluate risk; treated as an input from external data rather than fitted within the paper.

axioms (2)

domain assumption The Amazon rainforest has a potential tipping point from rainforest to savannah between 2 and 6°C of global warming.
Invoked in the first sentence of the abstract as the basis for the safe operating space definition.
domain assumption The reduced complexity model correctly incorporates adaptive capacities of the forest and atmospheric moisture recycling when driven by global climate model data.
Explicitly stated as the modeling approach used to quantify resilience.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5550 in / 1648 out tokens · 60065 ms · 2026-05-07T06:54:23.155299+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

[1]

B. M. Flores, E. Montoya, B. Sakschewski, N. Nascimento, A . Staal, R. A. Betts, C. Levis, D. M. Lapola, A. Esqu ´ıvel-Muelbert, C. Jakovac, C. A. Nobre, R. S. Oliveira, L. S. Borma, D. Nian, N. Boers, S. B. Hecht, H. ter Steege, J. Arieira, I. L. Lucas, E. Berenguer, J. A. Marengo, L. V . Gatti, C. R. C. Mattos, M. Hirota, Critical Tra nsitions in the Am...

2024
[2]

D. I. Armstrong McKay, A. Staal, J. F. Abrams, R. Winkelman n, B. Sakschewski, S. Loriani, I. Fetzer, S. E. Cornell, J. Rockstr ¨om, T. M. Lenton, Exceeding 1.5 ◦C Global Warming Could Trigger Multiple Climate Tipping Points. Science 377, eabn7950 (2022)

2022
[3]

L. V . Gatti, L. S. Basso, J. B. Miller, M. Gloor, L. Gatti Domingues, H. L. G. Cassol, G. Tejada, L. E. O. C. Arag ˜ao, C. Nobre, W. Peters, L. Marani, E. Arai, A. H. Sanches, S. M . Corr ˆea, L. Anderson, C. Von Randow, C. S. C. Correia, S. P . Crispim, R. A. L. Neves, Amazonia as a Carbon Source Linked to Deforestation and Climate Change. Nature 595, 3...

2021
[4]

Malhi, D

Y . Malhi, D. Wood, T. R. Baker, J. Wright, O. L. Phillips, T. Cochrane, P . Meir, J. Chave, S. Almeida, L. Arroyo, N. Higuchi, T. J. Killeen, S. G. Lauran ce, W. F. Laurance, S. L. Lewis, A. Monteagudo, D. A. Neill, P . N. Vargas, N. C. A. Pitman, C. A. Quesada, R. Salom ˜ao, J. N. M. Silva, A. T. Lezama, J. Terborgh, R. V . Mart´ınez, B. Vinceti, The Re...

2006
[5]

B. I. Cook, J. S. Mankin, K. Marvel, A. P . Williams, J. E. Sme rdon, K. J. Anchukaitis, T wenty-First Century Drought Projections in the CMIP6 Forcing Scenarios. Earth’s Future 8, e2019EF001461 (2020)

2020
[6]

P . B. Duﬀy, P . Brando, G. P . Asner, C. B. Field, Projections of Future Meteorological Drought and Wet Periods in the Amazon. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 112, 13172–13177 (2015)

2015
[7]

T. M. Lenton, H. Held, E. Kriegler, J. W. Hall, W. Lucht, S. R ahmstorf, H. J. Schellnhuber, Tipping Elements in the Earth’s Climate System. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 105, 1786–1793 (2008). 15

2008
[8]

Terpstra, S

S. Terpstra, S. K. J. Falkena, R. Bastiaansen, S. Bathiany , H. A. Dijkstra, A. S. von der Heydt, Assessment of Abrupt Shifts in CMIP6 Models Using Edge Detec tion. AGU Advances 6, e2025A V001698 (2025)

2025
[9]

I. M. Parry, P . D. L. Ritchie, P . M. Cox, Evidence of Localis ed Amazon Rainforest Dieback in CMIP6 Models. Earth Syst. Dyn. 13, 1667–1675 (2022)

2022
[10]

Drijfhout, S

S. Drijfhout, S. Bathiany, C. Beaulieu, V . Brovkin, M. Cl aussen, C. Huntingford, M. Scheﬀer, G. Sgubin, D. Swingedouw, Catalogue of Abrupt Shifts in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Models. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 112, E5777–E5786 (2015)

2015
[11]

Melnikova, T

I. Melnikova, T. Hajima, H. Shiogama, M. Hayashi, A. Ito,K. Nishina, K. Tachiiri, T. Y okohata, Amazon Dieback beyond the 21st Century under High-Emission Scenarios by Earth System Models. Commun. Earth Environ. 6, 670 (2025)

2025
[12]

B. M. Flores, A. Staal, Feedback in Tropical Forests of th e Anthropocene. Glob. Change Biol. 28, 5041–5061 (2022)

2022
[13]

D. C. Zemp, C.-F. Schleussner, H. M. J. Barbosa, M. Hirota , V . Montade, G. Sampaio, A. Staal, L. Wang-Erlandsson, A. Rammig, Self-Ampliﬁed Amazon Fores t Loss Due to Vegetation- Atmosphere Feedbacks. Nature Communications 8, 14681 (2017)

2017
[14]

P . M. Brando, J. Barlow, M. N. Macedo, D. V . Silv ´erio, J. N. Ferreira, L. Maracahipes, L. Anderson, D. C. Morton, A. Alencar, L. N. Paolucci, S. Jaco bs, H. Stouter, J. Randerson, B. M. Flores, B. Starinchak, M. Coe, M. M. Pires, L. Rattis, D. Armenteras, P . Artaxo, E. M. Ordway, S. Trumbore, C. Staver, E. Berenguer, I. O. Menor, L. Maracahipes-Santo...

2025
[15]

Staal, O

A. Staal, O. A. Tuinenburg, J. H. C. Bosmans, M. Holmgren, E. H. van Nes, M. Scheﬀer, D. C. Zemp, S. C. Dekker, Forest-Rainfall Cascades Buﬀer against Drought across the Amazon. Nature Clim. Chang. 8, 539–543 (2018)

2018
[16]

Boers, N

N. Boers, N. Marwan, H. M. J. Barbosa, J. Kurths, A Defores tation-Induced Tipping Point for the South American Monsoon System. Sci. Rep. 7, 41489 (2017). 16

2017
[17]

Staal, I

A. Staal, I. Fetzer, L. Wang-Erlandsson, J. H. C. Bosmans , S. C. Dekker, E. H. van Nes, J. Rockstr ¨om, O. A. Tuinenburg, Hysteresis of Tropical Forests in the 2 1st Century. Nature Communications 11, 4978 (2020)

2020
[18]

E. H. van Nes, M. Hirota, M. Holmgren, M. Scheﬀer, Tipping Points in Tropical Tree Cover: Linking Theory to Data. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 1016–1021 (2014)

2014
[19]

A. C. Staver, S. Archibald, S. A. Levin, The Global Extent and Determinants of Savanna and Forest as Alternative Biome States. Science 334, 230–232 (2011)

2011
[20]

Hirota, M

M. Hirota, M. Holmgren, E. H. V . Nes, M. Scheﬀer, Global Re silience of Tropical Forest and Savanna to Critical Transitions. Science 334, 232–235 (2011)

2011
[21]

D. Nian, S. Bathiany, B. Sakschewski, M. Dr¨ uke, L. Blasc hke, M. Ben- Y ami, W. von Bloh, N. Boers, Rainfall Seasonality Dominates Critical Precipi tation Threshold for the Amazon Forest in the LPJmL Vegetation Model. Sci. Total Environ. 947, 174378 (2024)

2024
[22]

O. L. Phillips, L. E. O. C. Arag ˜ao, S. L. Lewis, J. B. Fisher, J. Lloyd, G. L ´opez-Gonz´alez, Y . Malhi, A. Monteagudo, J. Peacock, C. A. Quesada, G. van derHeijden, S. Almeida, I. Amaral, L. Arroyo, G. Aymard, T. R. Baker, O. B´anki, L. Blanc, D. Bonal, P . Brando, J. Chave,´A. C. A. de Oliveira, N. D. Cardozo, C. I. Czimczik, T. R. Feldpausch, M. A. ...

2009
[23]

J. V . Tavares, R. S. Oliveira, M. Mencuccini, C. Signori- M¨ uller, L. Pereira, F. C. Diniz, M. Gilpin, M. J. Marca Zevallos, C. A. Salas Yupayccana, M. Ac osta, F. M. P ´erez Mullisaca, F. d. V . Barros, P . Bittencourt, H. Jancoski, M. C. Scalon, B. S. Marimon, I. Oliveras Menor, B. H. Marimon, M. Fancourt, A. Chambers-Ostler, A. Esquivel-Muelbert, L. ...

2023
[24]

Y . Fan, G. Miguez-Macho, E. G. Jobb´agy, R. B. Jackson, C. Otero-Casal, Hydrologic Regulation of Plant Rooting Depth. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 114, 10572–10577 (2017)

2017
[25]

Sakschewski, W

B. Sakschewski, W. von Bloh, M. Dr¨ uke, A. A. S ¨orensson, R. Ruscica, F. Langerwisch, M. Billing, S. Bereswill, M. Hirota, R. S. Oliveira, J. Heink e, K. Thonicke, Variable Tree Rooting Strategies Are Key for Modelling the Distribution,Productivity and Evapotranspiration of Tropical Evergreen Forests. Biogeosciences 18, 4091–4116 (2021)

2021
[26]

Staal, S

A. Staal, S. C. Dekker, M. Hirota, E. H. van Nes, Synergist ic Eﬀects of Drought and Defor- estation on the Resilience of the South-Eastern Amazon Rain forest. Ecol. Complex. 22, 65–75 (2015)

2015
[27]

M. A. Franco, L. V . Rizzo, M. J. Teixeira, P . Artaxo, T. Aze vedo, J. Lelieveld, C. A. Nobre, C. P ¨ohlker, U. P ¨oschl, J. Shimbo, X. Xu, L. A. T. Machado, How Climate Change a nd Defor- estation Interact in the Transformation of the Amazon Rainf orest. Nature Communications 16, 7944 (2025)

2025
[28]

L. H. Hajdu, A. G. C. A. Meesters, A. J. Dolman, A. D. Friend , Deforestation Could Push Amazonia Close to a Tipping Point Under Future Climate Chang e. Geophys. Res. Lett. 52, e2024GL108304 (2025)

2025
[29]

T. E. Lovejoy, C. Nobre, Amazon Tipping Point. Science Advances 4, eaat2340 (2018). 18

2018
[30]

Wunderling, A

N. Wunderling, A. Staal, B. Sakschewski, M. Hirota, O. A. Tuinenburg, J. F. Donges, H. M. J. Barbosa, R. Winkelmann, Recurrent Droughts Increase Risk o f Cascading Tipping Events by Outpacing Adaptive Capacities in the Amazon Rainforest. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 119, e2120777119 (2022)

2022
[31]

Scheﬀer, S

M. Scheﬀer, S. Barrett, S. R. Carpenter, C. Folke, A. J. Gr een, M. Holmgren, T. P . Hughes, S. Kosten, I. A. van de Leemput, D. C. Nepstad, E. H. van Nes, E. T. H. M. Peeters, B. Walker, Creating a Safe Operating Space for Iconic Ecosystems. Science 347, 1317–1319 (2015)

2015
[32]

Rockstr ¨om, W

J. Rockstr ¨om, W. Steﬀen, K. Noone, ˚ A. Persson, F. S. Chapin, E. F. Lambin, T. M. Lenton, M. Scheﬀer, C. Folke, H. J. Schellnhuber, B. Nykvist, C. A. de Wit, T. Hughes, S. van der Leeuw, H. Rodhe, S. S¨orlin, P . K. Snyder, R. Costanza, U. Svedin, M. Falkenmark, L. Karlberg, R. W. Corell, V . J. Fabry, J. Hansen, B. Walker, D. Liverman, K. Richardson, ...

2009
[33]

Rockstr ¨om, W

J. Rockstr ¨om, W. Steﬀen, K. Noone, ˚ A. Persson, F. S. Chapin, E. Lambin, T. M. Lenton, M. Scheﬀer, C. Folke, H. J. Schellnhuber, B. Nykvist, C. A. de Wit, T. Hughes, S. van der Leeuw, H. Rodhe, S. S¨orlin, P . K. Snyder, R. Costanza, U. Svedin, M. Falkenmark, L. Karlberg, R. W. Corell, V . J. Fabry, J. Hansen, B. Walker, D. Liverman, K. Richardson, P ....

2009
[34]

”State of the Global Climate 2025” (Tech. Rep. 1391, Worl d Meteorological Organization, 2025)

2025
[35]

Kr ¨onke, N

J. Kr ¨onke, N. Wunderling, R. Winkelmann, A. Staal, B. Stumpf, O. A. Tuinenburg, J. F. Donges, Dynamics of Tipping Cascades on Complex Networks. Phys. Rev. E 101, 042311 (2020)

2020
[36]

Wunderling, J

N. Wunderling, J. Kr ¨onke, V . Wohlfarth, J. Kohler, J. Heitzig, A. Staal, S. Willner, R. Winkel- mann, J. F. Donges, Modelling Nonlinear Dynamics of Interac ting Tipping Elements on Com- plex Networks: The PyCascades Package. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 230, 3163–3176 (2021)

2021
[37]

Wunderling, B

N. Wunderling, B. Sakschewski, J. Rockstr ¨om, B. Flores, M. Hirota, A. Staal, Deforestation- induced drying lowers Amazon climate threshold (2026), doi :https://doi.org/10.1038/ 19 s41586-026-10456-0, (in press at Nature, preprint availab le at: https://doi.org/10. 21203/rs.3.rs-5840795/v1)

2026
[38]

Seland, M

Ø. Seland, M. Bentsen, D. Olivi ´e, T. Toniazzo, A. Gjermundsen, L. S. Graﬀ, J. B. Debernard, A. K. Gupta, Y .-C. He, A. Kirkev ˚ag, J. Schwinger, J. Tjiputra, K. S. Aas, I. Bethke, Y . Fan, J. Griesfeller, A. Grini, C. Guo, M. Ilicak, I. H. H. Karset, O . Landgren, J. Liakka, K. O. Moseid, A. Nummelin, C. Spensberger, H. Tang, Z. Zhang, C. He inze, T. Iv...

2020
[39]

Malhi, L

Y . Malhi, L. E. O. C. Arag ˜ao, D. Galbraith, C. Huntingford, R. Fisher, P . Zelazowski,S. Sitch, C. McSweeney, P . Meir, Exploring the Likelihood and Mechani sm of a Climate-Change- Induced Dieback of the Amazon Rainforest. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 106, 20610–20615 (2009)

2009
[40]

Staal, P

A. Staal, P . Meijer, M. K. Nyasulu, O. A. Tuinenburg, S. C.Dekker, Global Terrestrial Moisture Recycling in Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Earth Syst. Dyn. 16, 215–238 (2025)

2025
[41]

Materials and methods are available as supplementary ma terial
[42]

B. S. Soares-Filho, D. C. Nepstad, L. M. Curran, G. C. Cerq ueira, R. A. Garcia, C. A. Ramos, E. Voll, A. McDonald, P . Lefebvre, P . Schlesinger, Modellin g Conservation in the Amazon Basin. Nature 440, 520–523 (2006)

2006
[43]

Bultan, Y

S. Bultan, Y . Moustakis, S. Bathiany, N. Boers, R. Ganzen m¨ uller, G. Gyuleva, J. Pongratz, Amazon Forest Faces Severe Decline under the Dual Pressures of Anthropogenic Climate Change and Land-Use Change. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 122, e2418813122 (2025)

2025
[44]

Wuyts, A

B. Wuyts, A. R. Champneys, J. I. House, Amazonian Forest- Savanna Bistability and Human Impact. Nature Communications 8, 15519 (2017)

2017
[45]

Zwaan, A

A. Zwaan, A. Staal, M. te Beest, M. Rietkerk, Widespread F orest-Savanna Coexistence but Limited Bistability at a Landscape Scale in Central Africa. Environ. Res. Lett. 19, 124035 (2024). 20

2024
[46]

D. Nian, S. Bathiany, M. Ben- Y ami, L. L. Blaschke, M. Hiro ta, R. R. Rodrigues, N. Boers, A Potential Collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation May Stabilise Eastern Amazonian Rainforests. Commun. Earth Environ. 4, 470 (2023)

2023
[47]

C. A. Boulton, T. M. Lenton, N. Boers, Pronounced Loss of A mazon Rainforest Resilience since the Early 2000s. Nature Clim. Chang. 12, 271–278 (2022)

2022
[48]

Rietkerk, V

M. Rietkerk, V . Skiba, E. Weinans, R. H´ebert, T. Laepple, Ambiguity of Early Warning Signals for Climate Tipping Points. Nat. Clim. Chang. 15, 479–488 (2025)

2025
[49]

Winkelmann, D

R. Winkelmann, D. P . Dennis, J. F. Donges, S. Loriani, A. K . Klose, J. F. Abrams, J. Alvarez- Solas, T. Albrecht, D. Armstrong McKay, S. Bathiany, J. Blasco Navarro, V . Brovkin, E. Burke, G. Danabasoglu, R. V . Donner, M. Dr¨ uke, G. Georgievski, H. Goelzer, A. B. Harper, G. Hegerl, M. Hirota, A. Hu, L. C. Jackson, C. Jones, H. Kim, T. Koenigk, P . Law...

work page doi:10.5194/egusphere-2025-1899 2025
[50]

L. E. O. C. Arag ˜ao, Y . Malhi, R. M. Roman-Cuesta, S. Saatchi, L. O. Anderson, Y . E. Shimabukuro, Spatial Patterns and Fire Response of Recent A mazonian Droughts. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34 (2007)

2007
[51]

J.- Y . Lee, J. Marotzke, G. Bala, L. Cao, S. Corti, J. Dunne , F. Engelbrecht, E. Fischer, J. Fyfe, C. Jones, A. Maycock, J. Mutemi, O. Ndiaye, S. Panickal, T. Zh ou, ”Future Global Cli- mate: Scenario-Based Projections and Near-Term Information”, in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to t he Sixth Assessment...

2021
[52]

O. A. Tuinenburg, A. Staal, Tracking the Global Flows of Atmospheric Moisture and Associated Uncertainties. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 24, 2419–2435 (2020). 21 Acknowledgments Funding: This is ClimTip contribution #156; the ClimTip project has r eceived funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement ...

work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.19913489 2020