IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v222y2011i17p3236-3249.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating weather effects on interannual variation in net ecosystem productivity of a coastal temperate forest landscape: A model intercomparison

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Z.
  • Grant, R.F.
  • Arain, M.A.
  • Chen, B.N.
  • Coops, N.
  • Hember, R.
  • Kurz, W.A.
  • Price, D.T.
  • Stinson, G.
  • Trofymow, J.A.
  • Yeluripati, J.
  • Chen, Z.

Abstract

Forest productivity is strongly affected by seasonal weather patterns and by natural or anthropogenic disturbances. However weather effects on forest productivity are not currently represented in inventory-based models such as CBM-CFS3 used in national forest C accounting programs. To evaluate different approaches to modelling these effects, a model intercomparison was conducted among CBM-CFS3 and four process models (ecosys, CN-CLASS, Can-IBIS and 3PG) over a 2500ha landscape in the Oyster River (OR) area of British Columbia, Canada. The process models used local weather data to simulate net primary productivity (NPP), net ecosystem productivity (NEP) and net biome productivity (NBP) from 1920 to 2005. Other inputs used by the process and inventory models were generated from soil, land cover and disturbance records. During a period of intense disturbance from 1928 to 1943, simulated NBP diverged considerably among the models. This divergence was attributed to differences among models in the sizes of detrital and humus C stocks in different soil layers to which a uniform set of soil C transformation coefficients was applied during disturbances. After the disturbance period, divergence in modelled NBP among models was much smaller, and attributed mainly to differences in simulated NPP caused by different approaches to modelling weather effects on productivity. In spite of these differences, age-detrended variation in annual NPP and NEP of closed canopy forest stands was negatively correlated with mean daily maximum air temperature during July–September (Tamax) in all process models (R2=0.4–0.6), indicating that these correlations were robust. The negative correlation between Tamax and NEP was attributed to different processes in different models, which were tested by comparing CO2 fluxes from these models with those measured by eddy covariance (EC) under contrasting air temperatures (Ta). The general agreement in sensitivity of annual NPP to Tamax among the process models led to the development of a generalized algorithm for weather effects on NPP of coastal temperate coniferous forests for use in inventory-based models such as CBM-CFS3: NPP′=NPP−57.1 (Tamax−18.6), where NPP and NPP′ are the current and temperature-adjusted annual NPP estimates from the inventory-based model, 18.6 is the long-term mean daily maximum air temperature during July–September, and Tamax is the mean value for the current year. Our analysis indicated that the sensitivity of NPP to Tamax was nonlinear, so that this algorithm should not be extrapolated beyond the conditions of this study. However the process-based methodology to estimate weather effects on NPP and NEP developed in this study is widely applicable to other forest types and may be adopted for other inventory based forest carbon cycle models.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Z. & Grant, R.F. & Arain, M.A. & Chen, B.N. & Coops, N. & Hember, R. & Kurz, W.A. & Price, D.T. & Stinson, G. & Trofymow, J.A. & Yeluripati, J. & Chen, Z., 2011. "Evaluating weather effects on interannual variation in net ecosystem productivity of a coastal temperate forest landscape: A model intercomparison," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(17), pages 3236-3249.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:222:y:2011:i:17:p:3236-3249
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.06.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380011003383
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.06.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. W. Kurz & M. Apps, 2006. "Developing Canada's National Forest Carbon Monitoring, Accounting and Reporting System to Meet the Reporting Requirements of the Kyoto Protocol," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 33-43, January.
    2. Kurz, W.A. & Dymond, C.C. & White, T.M. & Stinson, G. & Shaw, C.H. & Rampley, G.J. & Smyth, C. & Simpson, B.N. & Neilson, E.T. & Trofymow, J.A. & Metsaranta, J. & Apps, M.J., 2009. "CBM-CFS3: A model of carbon-dynamics in forestry and land-use change implementing IPCC standards," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(4), pages 480-504.
    3. Valerie A. Barber & Glenn Patrick Juday & Bruce P. Finney, 2000. "Reduced growth of Alaskan white spruce in the twentieth century from temperature-induced drought stress," Nature, Nature, vol. 405(6787), pages 668-673, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Huntzinger, D.N. & Post, W.M. & Wei, Y. & Michalak, A.M. & West, T.O. & Jacobson, A.R. & Baker, I.T. & Chen, J.M. & Davis, K.J. & Hayes, D.J. & Hoffman, F.M. & Jain, A.K. & Liu, S. & McGuire, A.D. & N, 2012. "North American Carbon Program (NACP) regional interim synthesis: Terrestrial biospheric model intercomparison," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 144-157.
    2. Wang, Z. & Grant, R.F. & Arain, M.A. & Bernier, P.Y. & Chen, B. & Chen, J.M. & Govind, A. & Guindon, L. & Kurz, W.A. & Peng, C. & Price, D.T. & Stinson, G. & Sun, J. & Trofymowe, J.A. & Yeluripati, J., 2013. "Incorporating weather sensitivity in inventory-based estimates of boreal forest productivity: A meta-analysis of process model results," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 260(C), pages 25-35.
    3. Shaw, C.H. & Hilger, A.B. & Metsaranta, J. & Kurz, W.A. & Russo, G. & Eichel, F. & Stinson, G. & Smyth, C. & Filiatrault, M., 2014. "Evaluation of simulated estimates of forest ecosystem carbon stocks using ground plot data from Canada's National Forest Inventory," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 272(C), pages 323-347.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Z. & Grant, R.F. & Arain, M.A. & Bernier, P.Y. & Chen, B. & Chen, J.M. & Govind, A. & Guindon, L. & Kurz, W.A. & Peng, C. & Price, D.T. & Stinson, G. & Sun, J. & Trofymowe, J.A. & Yeluripati, J., 2013. "Incorporating weather sensitivity in inventory-based estimates of boreal forest productivity: A meta-analysis of process model results," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 260(C), pages 25-35.
    2. Shaw, C.H. & Hilger, A.B. & Metsaranta, J. & Kurz, W.A. & Russo, G. & Eichel, F. & Stinson, G. & Smyth, C. & Filiatrault, M., 2014. "Evaluation of simulated estimates of forest ecosystem carbon stocks using ground plot data from Canada's National Forest Inventory," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 272(C), pages 323-347.
    3. Smyth, C.E. & Kurz, W.A. & Trofymow, J.A., 2011. "Including the effects of water stress on decomposition in the Carbon Budget Model of the Canadian Forest Sector CBM-CFS3," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(5), pages 1080-1091.
    4. Hararuk, Oleksandra & Shaw, Cindy & Kurz, Werner A., 2017. "Constraining the organic matter decay parameters in the CBM-CFS3 using Canadian National Forest Inventory data and a Bayesian inversion technique," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 364(C), pages 1-12.
    5. Hagemann, Ulrike & Moroni, Martin T. & Shaw, Cindy H. & Kurz, Werner A. & Makeschin, Franz, 2010. "Comparing measured and modelled forest carbon stocks in high-boreal forests of harvest and natural-disturbance origin in Labrador, Canada," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(5), pages 825-839.
    6. Xiuchen Wu & Hongyan Liu & Dali Guo & Oleg A Anenkhonov & Natalya K Badmaeva & Denis V Sandanov, 2012. "Growth Decline Linked to Warming-Induced Water Limitation in Hemi-Boreal Forests," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(8), pages 1-12, August.
    7. Metsaranta, J.M. & Kurz, W.A., 2012. "Inter-annual variability of ecosystem production in boreal jack pine forests (1975–2004) estimated from tree-ring data using CBM-CFS3," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 111-123.
    8. Seidl, Rupert & Fernandes, Paulo M. & Fonseca, Teresa F. & Gillet, François & Jönsson, Anna Maria & Merganičová, Katarína & Netherer, Sigrid & Arpaci, Alexander & Bontemps, Jean-Daniel & Bugmann, Hara, 2011. "Modelling natural disturbances in forest ecosystems: a review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(4), pages 903-924.
    9. Zhenju Chen & Xianliang Zhang & Xingyuan He & Nicole Davi & Lulu Li & Xueping Bai, 2015. "Response of radial growth to warming and CO 2 enrichment in southern Northeast China: a case of Pinus tabulaeformis," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 130(4), pages 559-571, June.
    10. Ima Ituen & Baoxin Hu, 2024. "Assessing the Impact of Land Conversion on Carbon Stocks and GHG Emissions," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-31, August.
    11. Shenghao Feng & Xiujian Peng & Philip Adams, 2021. "Energy and Economic Implications of Carbon Neutrality in China -- A Dynamic General Equilibrium Analysis," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-318, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    12. Bona, Kelly A. & Webster, Kara L. & Thompson, Dan K. & Hararuk, Oleksandra & Zhang, Gary & Kurz, Werner A., 2024. "Using the Canadian Model for Peatlands (CaMP) to examine greenhouse gas emissions and carbon sink strength in Canada's boreal and temperate peatlands," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 490(C).
    13. Jing Zhao & Hui Hu & Jinglei Wang, 2022. "Forest Carbon Reserve Calculation and Comprehensive Economic Value Evaluation: A Forest Management Model Based on Both Biomass Expansion Factor Method and Total Forest Value," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-15, November.
    14. Raphaël Chavardès & Lori Daniels & Patrick Waeber & John Innes & Craig Nitschke, 2013. "Unstable climate−growth relations for white spruce in southwest Yukon, Canada," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 116(3), pages 593-611, February.
    15. Lucash, Melissa S. & Marshall, Adrienne M. & Weiss, Shelby A. & McNabb, John W. & Nicolsky, Dmitry J. & Flerchinger, Gerald N. & Link, Timothy E. & Vogel, Jason G. & Scheller, Robert M. & Abramoff, Ro, 2023. "Burning trees in frozen soil: Simulating fire, vegetation, soil, and hydrology in the boreal forests of Alaska," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 481(C).
    16. Miquelajauregui, Yosune & Cumming, Steven G. & Gauthier, Sylvie, 2019. "Short-term responses of boreal carbon stocks to climate change: A simulation study of black spruce forests," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 409(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Eryuan Liang & Christoph Leuschner & Choimaa Dulamsuren & Bettina Wagner & Markus Hauck, 2016. "Global warming-related tree growth decline and mortality on the north-eastern Tibetan plateau," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 163-176, January.
    18. Koichi Takahashi & Isao Okuhara, 2013. "Forecasting the effects of global warming on radial growth of subalpine trees at the upper and lower distribution limits in central Japan," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 273-287, March.
    19. Laura Gray & Andreas Hamann, 2013. "Tracking suitable habitat for tree populations under climate change in western North America," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 289-303, March.
    20. C. Thompson & A. McGuire & J. Clein & F. Chapin & J. Beringer, 2006. "Net Carbon Exchange Across the Arctic Tundra-Boreal Forest Transition in Alaska 1981–2000," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 805-827, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:222:y:2011:i:17:p:3236-3249. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.