IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v350y2017icp55-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An improved Biome-BGC model for estimating net primary productivity of alpine meadow on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau

Author

Listed:
  • Sun, Qingling
  • Li, Baolin
  • Zhang, Tao
  • Yuan, Yecheng
  • Gao, Xizhang
  • Ge, Jinsong
  • Li, Fei
  • Zhang, Zhijun

Abstract

The process-based Biome-BGC (BioGeochemical Cycles) model is widely used to simulate the storage and flux of water, carbon, and nitrogen within an ecosystem. However, the Biome-BGC model neglects the existence of underground persistent portion of perennial grasses as well as functional differences between the fast-cycling and persistent roots, which are assumed to negatively impact the accurate estimation of net primary productivity (NPP) of alpine meadow on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. This study presents the Perennial Deciduous Grasses (PDG) NPP model developed under the framework of Biome-BGC version 4.2. In the PDG NPP model, underground roots of perennial grasses were partitioned into two portions, the fast-cycling portion and the persistent portion. These two portions were represented by different turnover fractions, carbon to nitrogen ratios, and allocation ratios in the PDG NPP model. Processes primarily involving allocation, maintenance respiration, growth respiration, litterfall and mortality, and transfer growth were modified to account for the differences between fast-cycling and persistent roots. Measured NPP including both aboveground NPP (ANPP) and belowground NPP (BNPP) at Zhenqin Station in Qinghai Province, China, was used to validate estimates of the PDG NPP model. The results showed that the PDG NPP model has a higher estimation accuracy of NPP than the Biome-BGC model. The root mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute percent error (MAPE) of total NPP estimated from the PDG NPP model were 15.1gC/m2/yr and 12.1%, respectively, whereas those from the Biome-BGC model were 49.8gC/m2/yr and 39.9%, respectively. Both RMSE and MAPE of ANPP and BNPP estimates based on the Biome-BGC model were approximately 3 times those based on the PDG NPP model. Improvements of NPP estimation were mainly attributed to the decreasing estimates of gross primary productivity which was caused by the increase of water stress and decrease of soil N availability simulated during growing seasons. Therefore, the PDG NPP model is more reflective of the limitations of water and nutrients to vegetation growth and productivity when applied to the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.

Suggested Citation

  • Sun, Qingling & Li, Baolin & Zhang, Tao & Yuan, Yecheng & Gao, Xizhang & Ge, Jinsong & Li, Fei & Zhang, Zhijun, 2017. "An improved Biome-BGC model for estimating net primary productivity of alpine meadow on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 350(C), pages 55-68.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:350:y:2017:i:c:p:55-68
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.01.025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380017300972
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.01.025?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. Di Vittorio, Alan V. & Anderson, Ryan S. & White, Joseph D. & Miller, Norman L. & Running, Steven W., 2010. "Development and optimization of an Agro-BGC ecosystem model for C4 perennial grasses," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(17), pages 2038-2053.
    2. Hidy, D. & Barcza, Z. & Haszpra, L. & Churkina, G. & Pintér, K. & Nagy, Z., 2012. "Development of the Biome-BGC model for simulation of managed herbaceous ecosystems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 226(C), pages 99-119.
    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. Cho, Nanghyun & Agossou, Casimir & Kim, Eunsook & Lim, Jong-Hwan & Seo, Jeong-Wook & Kang, Sinkyu, 2023. "Machine-learning modeling on tree mortality and growth reduction of temperate forests with climatic and ecophysiological parameters," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 483(C).
    2. Chaobin Zhang & Ying Zhang & Jianlong Li, 2019. "Grassland Productivity Response to Climate Change in the Hulunbuir Steppes of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-15, November.
    3. Qifei Han & Geping Luo & Chaofan Li & Shoubo Li, 2018. "Response of Carbon Dynamics to Climate Change Varied among Different Vegetation Types in Central Asia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, September.
    4. Junyi Liu & Zhixiang Wu & Siqi Yang & Chuan Yang, 2022. "Sensitivity Analysis of Biome-BGC for Gross Primary Production of a Rubber Plantation Ecosystem: A Case Study of Hainan Island, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-13, October.

    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. Han, Qifei & Li, Chaofan & Zhao, Chengyi & Zhang, Yaoqi & Li, Shoubo, 2018. "Grazing decreased water use efficiency in Central Asia from 1979 to 2011," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 388(C), pages 72-79.
    2. Ma, Shaoxiu & Churkina, Galina & Wieland, Ralf & Gessler, Arthur, 2011. "Optimization and evaluation of the ANTHRO-BGC model for winter crops in Europe," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(20), pages 3662-3679.
    3. Hidy, D. & Barcza, Z. & Haszpra, L. & Churkina, G. & Pintér, K. & Nagy, Z., 2012. "Development of the Biome-BGC model for simulation of managed herbaceous ecosystems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 226(C), pages 99-119.
    4. Maša Zorana Ostrogović Sever & Zoltán Barcza & Dóra Hidy & Anikó Kern & Doroteja Dimoski & Slobodan Miko & Ozren Hasan & Branka Grahovac & Hrvoje Marjanović, 2021. "Evaluation of the Terrestrial Ecosystem Model Biome-BGCMuSo for Modelling Soil Organic Carbon under Different Land Uses," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-23, September.
    5. Kipling, Richard P. & Bannink, André & Bellocchi, Gianni & Dalgaard, Tommy & Fox, Naomi J. & Hutchings, Nicholas J. & Kjeldsen, Chris & Lacetera, Nicola & Sinabell, Franz & Topp, Cairistiona F.E. & va, 2016. "Modeling European ruminant production systems: Facing the challenges of climate change," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 24-37.
    6. Chaobin Zhang & Ying Zhang & Jianlong Li, 2019. "Grassland Productivity Response to Climate Change in the Hulunbuir Steppes of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-15, November.
    7. Jakubowski, Wojciech & Szulczewski, Wiesław & Żyromski, Andrzej & Biniak-Pieróg, Małgorzata, 2016. "The estimation of basket willow (Salix viminalis) yield – New approach, Part II: Theoretical model and its practical application," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 843-851.
    8. Long, Huiling & Li, Xiaobing & Wang, Hong & Jia, Jingdun, 2013. "Biomass resources and their bioenergy potential estimation: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 344-352.
    9. Xiaotao Huang & Yongsheng Yang & Chunbo Chen & Hongfei Zhao & Buqing Yao & Zhen Ma & Li Ma & Huakun Zhou, 2022. "Quantifying and Mapping Human Appropriation of Net Primary Productivity in Qinghai Grasslands in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-13, March.
    10. Hunt, Natalie D. & Gower, Stith T. & Nadelhoffer, Knute & Lajtha, Kate & Townsend, Kimberly & Brye, Kristofor R., 2016. "Validation of an agroecosystem process model (AGRO-BGC) on annual and perennial bioenergy feedstocks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 321(C), pages 23-34.
    11. Qifei Han & Geping Luo & Chaofan Li & Shoubo Li, 2018. "Response of Carbon Dynamics to Climate Change Varied among Different Vegetation Types in Central Asia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, September.
    12. Bodin, P. & Olin, S. & Pugh, T.A.M. & Arneth, A., 2016. "Accounting for interannual variability in agricultural intensification: The potential of crop selection in Sub-Saharan Africa," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 159-168.

    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:350:y:2017:i:c:p:55-68. 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.