Scaling an Instantaneous Model of Tundra NEE to the Arctic Landscape
- 466 Downloads
We scale a model of net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE) for tundra ecosystems and assess model performance using eddy covariance measurements at three tundra sites. The model, initially developed using instantaneous (seconds–minutes) chamber flux (~m2) observations, independently represents ecosystem respiration (ER) and gross primary production (GPP), and requires only temperature (T), photosynthetic photon flux density (I 0), and leaf area index (L) as inputs. We used a synthetic data set to parameterize the model so that available in situ observations could be used to assess the model. The model was then scaled temporally to daily resolution and spatially to about 1 km2 resolution, and predicted values of NEE, and associated input variables, were compared to observations obtained from eddy covariance measurements at three flux tower sites over several growing seasons. We compared observations to modeled NEE calculated using T and I 0 measured at the towers, and L derived from MODIS data. Cumulative NEE estimates were within 17 and 11% of instrumentation period and growing season observations, respectively. Predictions improved when one site-year experiencing anomalously dry conditions was excluded, indicating the potential importance of stomatal control on GPP and/or soil moisture on ER. Notable differences in model performance resulted from ER model formulations and differences in how L was estimated. Additional work is needed to gain better predictive ability in terms of ER and L. However, our results demonstrate the potential of this model to permit landscape scale estimates of NEE using relatively few and simple driving variables that are easily obtained via satellite remote sensing.
Key wordstundra CO2 flux NEE upscaling modeling arctic carbon exchange
We acknowledge funding from the National Science Foundation (Grants OPP-0732954 to WHRC, and OPP-0632139, OPP-0808789, DEB-0829285, and DEB-0423385to the MBL), and from the Canadian Foundation of Climate and Atmospheric Sciences to PML and ERH.
- ACIA. 2004. Arctic climate change impact assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Field CB. 1991. Ecological scaling of carbon gain to stress and resource availability. In: Mooney HA, Winner WE, Pell EJ, Eds. Response of plants to multiple stresses. San Diego: Academic Press. Google Scholar
- Huemmrich KF, Gamon JA, Tweedie CE, Oberbauer SF, Kinoshita G, Houston S, Kuchy A, Hollister RD, Kwon H, Mano M, Harazono Y, Webber PJ, Oechel WC. 2010. Remote sensing of tundra gross ecosystem productivity and light use efficiency under varying temperature and moisture conditions. Remote Sens Environ 114:481–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- R Development Core Team, 2009. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R FOUNDATION FOR STATISTICAL COmputing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, http://www.R-project.org.
- Reichstein M, Rey A, Freibauer A, Tenhunen J, Valentini R, Banza J, Casals P, Cheng Y, Grunzweig J, Irvine J. 2003. Modeling temporal and large-scale spatial variability of soil respiration from soil water availability, temperature and vegetation productivity indices. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 17:1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rocha A, Shaver G, In Press. Burn severity influences post-fire CO2 exchange in arctic tundra. Ecol Appl. doi: 10.1890/10-0255.1.
- Ruimy A, Jarvis P, Baldocchi D, Saugier B. 1995. CO2 Fluxes over plant canopies and solar radiation: a review. Adv Ecol Res 26:2–68.Google Scholar
- Schuur E, Bockheim J, Canadell J, Euskirchen E, Field C, Goryachkin S, Hagemann S, Kuhry P, Lafleur P, Lee H, Mazhitova G, Nelson FE, Rinke A, Romanovsky VE, Shiklomanov N, Tarnocai C, Venevsky S, Vogel JG, Zimov SA. 2008. Vulnerability of permafrost carbon to climate change: implications for the global carbon cycle. Bioscience 58:701–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Vourlitis G, Oechel W, Hope A, Stow D, Boynton B, Verfaillie J, Zulueta R, Hastings S. 2000a. Physiological models for scaling plot measurements of CO2 flux across an arctic tundra landscape. Ecol Appl 10:60–72.Google Scholar