*Indonesia is omitted from this analysis as its very large mangrove area has a significant impact upon the country-by-country regression which masks differences between countries with smaller differences between datasets
**The CIFOR dataset is omitted from these analyses. This map exhibits large erroneous differences from the other datasets and are therefore not included.
Figure 1: Top 10 mangrove holding nations in comparable between datasets
Figure 2: A full matrix of all countries compared with each dataset. Indonesia is omitted due to its heavy influence upon the comparison
Figure 3: Difference from the median mangrove area per county per dataset. The CIFOR dataset is omitted from the analysis
Figure 4: The SD of all mangrove datasets per country. The CIFOR dataset is omitted from the analysis
Mangrove Aboveground Biomass (AGB)
Figure 5: Top 10 mangrove AGB (mean and total) holding nations
Figure 6: Differences between AGB (mean, total and %) per country between datasets
Mangrove Soil Carbon (C)
Across all four soil c datasets, Indonesia contained the greatest cumulative total of mangrove soil C. This is predominantly due to Indonesia containing the greatest mangrove area. Brazil, Malaysia, Mexico, Australia and Nigeria frequently appear in the top 6 in each dataset although appear in different orders, again reflective of these countries being large mangrove holding nations (Figure 7). The Sanderman dataset predominantly predicts the greatest mangrove soil C across all top 10 countries (per dataset) while the Rovai dataset consistently predicts the lowest soil C content. It is important to note that the Atwood dataset is based upon the CGMFC-21 extent map which measures extent as a function of tree cover, despite tree cover not being a good proxy for soil cover/type.
While the top 10 total mangrove soil c nations are in general agreement, this is not true of the mean soil c per country. Figure 8* demonstrates this on a per country basis with very little agreement between datasets with low r-square and high MAE values. No two datasets are in agreement, unlike the mangrove area maps, demonstrating the variability that must be accounted for when estimating soil c values per country, across a large geographical domain.
Figure 7: Top 10 mangrove Soil C (total) holding nations
Figure 8: A full matrix of all countries compared with each dataset. Indonesia is omitted due to its heavy influence upon the comparison