[relaxing]

Unfortunately this Nature article (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0220-7 ) is behind a paywall, but the NASA summary implies they measured "leaf area".

The Science article (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aax1396 ) claims Leaf Area Index (same or different measure than the Nature study?) "exhibited a transition from increasing trends before the late 1990s to decreasing trends afterward".

So at first blush yes, but the details will doubtlessly prove otherwise.

If anyone has an institutional login and can post a pdf, please do.

[ylere]

https://sci-hub.se/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-01...

[relaxing]

Thank you.

So. Science Paper (SP) uses data from 2 spaceborne sensors, MODIS and AVHRR.

Nature Paper (NP) uses data from AVHRR alongside 3 other metrics: GLASS, GLOBMAP, and TCDR, all of which claim to be fusions of the same data from MODIS and AVHRR. (https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/8/3/263 ... https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/201... ... https://zenodo.org/records/4700264 )

NP supplementals show the data from AVHRR does trend upwards to the present data (agreeing with SP), but the other 3 metrics are trending flat (GLASS, TCDR) or downward (GLOBMAP).

I have neither the expertise nor inclination to delve further into the various methodologies of creating these various Leaf Area Indices.

[itishappy]

Full text available for free here:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6376198/