IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v291y2014icp134-141.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uncertainty in initial forest structure and composition when predicting carbon dynamics in a temperate forest

Author

Listed:
  • Antonarakis, A.S.

Abstract

The initial or current ecosystem state is a necessary factor in forecasting how terrestrial ecosystems will respond to changes in climate, CO2, and other environmental forcings over the upcoming decades. Terrestrial biosphere models are important forecasting tools, but to improve our understanding of large-scale terrestrial ecosystem function, we need to consider data from a number of sources and scales. Today remote sensing is improving our ability to derive information on forest structure and composition at a variety of scales, but their uncertainties in deriving these products to predicted carbon fluxes have not been investigated. This study investigated how uncertainties in forest structure and composition initialized at a temperate North American forest using a state-of-the-art terrestrial biosphere model affect predictions of carbon dynamics in the short and decadal time-frame. Uncertainties in net carbon predictions are compared to a ±20% uncertainty value estimated for the terrestrial sink component of the global carbon budget (Pan et al., 2011). For short-term simulations, a ±20% uncertainty in both forest structure and composition is enough to predict a net carbon flux variation of ±21.5% (±0.077kgC/m2/year) and ±20.5% (±0.092kgC/m2/year) respectively. For medium-term (11–40 years) simulations, only a 50% uncertainty in the initial forest structure predicts a net carbon flux variation beyond the ±20% threshold, but uncertainties in net carbon flux variation beyond ±20% were predicted from a 5% change in initial composition after 25 years of simulation. Remote sensing-derived forest structure and composition using LiDAR and imaging spectroscopy were also initialized, with all short term simulated net carbon fluxes within the ±20% cutoff. These results indicate that an accurate and full description of forest structure and composition from remote sensing within a ±20% uncertainty can be adequate in producing improved forecasts of terrestrial ecosystems for the next few decades.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonarakis, A.S., 2014. "Uncertainty in initial forest structure and composition when predicting carbon dynamics in a temperate forest," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 291(C), pages 134-141.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:291:y:2014:i:c:p:134-141
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.07.030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380014003780
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.07.030?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. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Xianming Dou & Yongguo Yang & Jinhui Luo, 2018. "Estimating Forest Carbon Fluxes Using Machine Learning Techniques Based on Eddy Covariance Measurements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, January.
    2. Sohl, Terry L. & Wimberly, Michael C. & Radeloff, Volker C. & Theobald, David M. & Sleeter, Benjamin M., 2016. "Divergent projections of future land use in the United States arising from different models and scenarios," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 281-297.
    3. Krishna, Dyvavani K. & Watham, Taibanganba & Padalia, Hitendra & Srinet, Ritika & Nandy, Subrata, 2023. "Improved gross primary productivity estimation using semi empirical (PRELES) model for moist Indian sal forest," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 475(C).
    4. Yan, Hao & Wang, Shao-qiang & Billesbach, Dave & Oechel, Walter & Bohrer, Gil & Meyers, Tilden & Martin, Timothy A. & Matamala, Roser & Phillips, Richard P. & Rahman, Faiz & Yu, Qin & Shugart, Herman , 2015. "Improved global simulations of gross primary product based on a new definition of water stress factor and a separate treatment of C3 and C4 plants," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 297(C), pages 42-59.
    5. Keane, Robert E. & McKenzie, Donald & Falk, Donald A. & Smithwick, Erica A.H. & Miller, Carol & Kellogg, Lara-Karena B., 2015. "Representing climate, disturbance, and vegetation interactions in landscape models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 309, pages 33-47.
    6. Sannigrahi, Srikanta, 2017. "Modeling terrestrial ecosystem productivity of an estuarine ecosystem in the Sundarban Biosphere Region, India using seven ecosystem models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 356(C), pages 73-90.
    7. Schwalm, C.R. & Huntzinger, D.N. & Cook, R.B. & Wei, Y. & Baker, I.T. & Neilson, R.P. & Poulter, B. & Caldwell, Peter & Sun, G. & Tian, H.Q. & Zeng, N., 2015. "How well do terrestrial biosphere models simulate coarse-scale runoff in the contiguous United States?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 303(C), pages 87-96.
    8. Hanqin Tian & Guangsheng Chen & Chaoqun Lu & Xiaofeng Xu & Daniel Hayes & Wei Ren & Shufen Pan & Deborah Huntzinger & Steven Wofsy, 2015. "North American terrestrial CO 2 uptake largely offset by CH 4 and N 2 O emissions: toward a full accounting of the greenhouse gas budget," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 129(3), pages 413-426, April.
    9. Mekonnen, Zelalem A. & Grant, Robert F. & Schwalm, Christopher, 2016. "Sensitivity of modeled NEP to climate forcing and soil at site and regional scales: Implications for upscaling ecosystem models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 241-257.
    10. Li, Zhengpeng & Liu, Shuguang & Zhang, Xuesong & West, Tristram O. & Ogle, Stephen M. & Zhou, Naijun, 2016. "Evaluating land cover influences on model uncertainties—A case study of cropland carbon dynamics in the Mid-Continent Intensive Campaign region," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 337(C), pages 176-187.

    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:291:y:2014:i:c:p:134-141. 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.