IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v297y2015icp42-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • 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 H.

Abstract

Accurate simulation of terrestrial gross primary production (GPP), the largest global carbon flux, benefits our understanding of carbon cycle and its source of variation. This paper presents a novel light use efficiency-based GPP model called the terrestrial ecosystem carbon flux model (TEC) driven by MODIS FPAR and climate data coupled with a precipitation-driven evapotranspiration (E) model (Yan et al., 2012). TEC incorporated a new water stress factor, defined as the ratio of actual E to Priestley and Taylor (1972) potential evaporation (EPT). A maximum light use efficiency (ϵ*) of 1.8gCMJ−1 and 2.76gCMJ−1 was applied to C3 and C4 ecosystems, respectively. An evaluation at 18 eddy covariance flux towers representing various ecosystem types under various climates indicates that the TEC model predicted monthly average GPP for all sites with overall statistics of r=0.85, RMSE=2.20gCm−2day−1, and bias=−0.05gCm−2day−1. For comparison the MODIS GPP products (MOD17A2) had overall statistics of r=0.73, RMSE=2.82gCm−2day−1, and bias=−0.31gCm−2day−1 for this same set of data. In this case, the TEC model performed better than MOD17A2 products, especially for C4 plants. We obtained an estimate of global mean annual GPP flux at 128.2±1.5PgCyr−1 from monthly MODIS FPAR and European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) ERA reanalysis data at a 1.0° spatial resolution over 11 year period from 2000 to 2010. This falls in the range of published land GPP estimates that consider the effect of C4 and C3 species. The TEC model with its new definition of water stress factor and its parameterization of C4 and C3 plants should help better understand the coupled climate-carbon cycle processes.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:297:y:2015:i:c:p:42-59
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.11.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380014005602
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.11.002?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.
    2. Li, Xianglan & Liang, Shunlin & Yu, Guirui & Yuan, Wenping & Cheng, Xiao & Xia, Jiangzhou & Zhao, Tianbao & Feng, Jinming & Ma, Zhuguo & Ma, Mingguo & Liu, Shaomin & Chen, Jiquan & Shao, Changliang & , 2013. "Estimation of gross primary production over the terrestrial ecosystems in China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 261, pages 80-92.
    3. Sasai, T. & Okamoto, K. & Hiyama, T. & Yamaguchi, Y., 2007. "Comparing terrestrial carbon fluxes from the scale of a flux tower to the global scale," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 208(2), pages 135-144.
    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. Jianfei Mo & Yanli Chen & Weihua Mo & Yue Zhang, 2022. "Realization and Prediction of Ecological Restoration Potential of Vegetation in Karst Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-21, September.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Shi, Yusheng & Sasai, Takahiro & Yamaguchi, Yasushi, 2014. "Spatio-temporal evaluation of carbon emissions from biomass burning in Southeast Asia during the period 2001–2010," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 272(C), pages 98-115.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Shishi Liu & Wei Du & Hang Su & Shanqin Wang & Qingfeng Guan, 2018. "Quantifying Impacts of Land-Use/Cover Change on Urban Vegetation Gross Primary Production: A Case Study of Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, March.
    7. Cong Zhang & Xiaojun Yao & Lina Xiu & Huian Jin & Juan Cao, 2024. "Spatial and Temporal Dynamics of Ecological Parameters in Various Land Use Types in China during the First 20 Years of the 21st Century," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-22, April.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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).
    11. Xiaoshuai Wei & Mingze Xu & Hongxian Zhao & Xinyue Liu & Zifan Guo & Xinhao Li & Tianshan Zha, 2024. "Exploring Sensitivity of Phenology to Seasonal Climate Differences in Temperate Grasslands of China Based on Normalized Difference Vegetation Index," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-20, March.
    12. Sasai, Takahiro & Nakai, Saori & Setoyama, Yuko & Ono, Keisuke & Kato, Soushi & Mano, Masayoshi & Murakami, Kazutaka & Miyata, Akira & Saigusa, Nobuko & Nemani, Ramakrishna R. & Nasahara, Kenlo N., 2012. "Analysis of the spatial variation in the net ecosystem production of rice paddy fields using the diagnostic biosphere model, BEAMS," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 247(C), pages 175-189.
    13. Li, Xiran & Zhu, Zaichun & Zeng, Hui & Piao, Shilong, 2016. "Estimation of gross primary production in China (1982–2010) with multiple ecosystem models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 324(C), pages 33-44.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Yuan, Wenping & Cai, Wenwen & Liu, Shuguang & Dong, Wenjie & Chen, Jiquan & Arain, M. Altaf & Blanken, Peter D. & Cescatti, Alessandro & Wohlfahrt, Georg & Georgiadis, Teodoro & Genesio, Lorenzo & Gia, 2014. "Vegetation-specific model parameters are not required for estimating gross primary production," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 292(C), pages 1-10.

    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:297:y:2015:i:c:p:42-59. 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.