## 3 Results
### Impact of Forest Fragmentation on Amazon Biomass and Productivity at Landscape Level  
In the first part of the study (Section 3.2), we analyzed the forest biomass and productivity on a fine scale (25 m). In most cases, only small differences were found between forest edge and core areas (e.g., for NPP +13%, for AGB \(-\)27%). In the second part of this study, we analyzed the impacts of fragmentation on forests on a landscape scale (10 \(\times\) 10 km\({}^{2}\)). The classification of the landscape level was based on the degree of forest fragmentation. We divided the Amazon rainforest into three different classes: low-fragmented forest, moderate-fragmented forest and highly fragmented forest (Figure 4). Low-fragmented forest are regions in which less than 10% of the GEDI shots are in forest edge areas. Moderate-fragmented areas have between 10 and 25% edge area and highly fragmented areas are landscapes with more than 25% forest edge area. For the landscape analysis, this classification was used to differentiate between the various landscape types (Figures 4-7). The three different fragmentation landscape types are distributed as follows: 53.5% of the Amazon is low-fragmented, 18.3% moderate-fragmented and 28.2% highly fragmented (Figure 4). It is evident that low-fragmented landscapes dominate in the central Amazon. Highly fragmented landscapes are mainly found in the areas of the Arc of Deforestation, at \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline  & **Edge (CV)** & **Core (CV)** & **Difference between Core and Edge Values** \\ \hline
**Aboveground biomass [Mg odm ha\({}^{-1}\)]** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} 172 \(\pm\) 86 \\ (50\%) \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} 235 \(\pm\) 85 \\ (36\%) \\ \end{tabular} & \(-\)27\% \\ \hline
**Net primary productivity [Mg C ha\({}^{-1}\) a\({}^{-1}\)]** & \begin{tabular}{c} 5.4 \(\pm\) 1.5 \\ (29\%) \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} 4.7 \(\pm\) 1.3 \\ (28\%) \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} 4.1 \(\pm\) 1.3 \\ +13\% \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
**Gross primary productivity [Mg C ha\({}^{-1}\) a\({}^{-1}\)]** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} 22 \(\pm\) 7 \\ (31\%) \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} 24 \(\pm\) 6 \\ (23\%) \\ \end{tabular} & \(-\)8\% \\ \hline
**Leaf area index [-]** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} 3.9 \(\pm\) 1.4 \\ (35\%) \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} 4.6 \(\pm\) 1.1 \\ (25\%) \\ \end{tabular} & \(-\)15\% \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Mean values and standard deviation, the coefficient of variation (CV) for the four forest attributes considered: aboveground biomass, net primary productivity, gross primary productivity and leaf area index. In addition, the relative difference between the mean values of the edge and the mean values of the core area is given. The values were determined for the 110 million GEDI shots that lie in the edge and core area. CV is the ratio of the standard deviation to the mean. the edge of the Andes and along the Amazon River. Moderate-fragmented landscapes are found in the transition zones. The aboveground biomass, net primary productivity, gross primary productivity and leaf area index of forests were examined (10 \(\times\) 10 km\({}^{2}\)). As a result, frequency distributions of the forest attributes were obtained (Figures 5 and S7), including the respective mean values for low-fragmented, moderate-fragmented and highly fragmented areas. Figure 4: The Amazon map divided into three regions: low-fragmented (petrol blue), moderate-fragmented (yellow) and highly fragmented (purple). In each 10 km\({}^{2}\) cell, the GEDI shots were counted and then the percentage of edge regions was calculated. If less than 10% of the GEDI shots in the considered tile are in the edge region, it is a low-fragmented area, tiles with an edge percentage between 10% and 25% are assigned as moderate-fragmented areas, and regions with more than 25% edge region are highly fragmented. A map showing the Amazon-wide values of edge proportions can be found in the attachment (Figure S6).