Towards a consistency cross-check of eddy covariance flux based and biometric estimates of ecosystem carbon balance (Articolo in rivista)

Type
Label
  • Towards a consistency cross-check of eddy covariance flux based and biometric estimates of ecosystem carbon balance (Articolo in rivista) (literal)
Anno
  • 2009-01-01T00:00:00+01:00 (literal)
Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#doi
  • 10.1029/2008GB003377 (literal)
Alternative label
  • Luyssaert S., Reichstein M., Schulze E.-D., Janssens I.A., Law B.E., Papale D., Dragoni D., Goulden M., Granier A., Kutsch W.L., Linder S., Matteucci G., Moors E., Munger J.W., Pilegaard K., Saunders M., Falge E. M. (2009)
    Towards a consistency cross-check of eddy covariance flux based and biometric estimates of ecosystem carbon balance
    in Global biogeochemical cycles
    (literal)
Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#autori
  • Luyssaert S., Reichstein M., Schulze E.-D., Janssens I.A., Law B.E., Papale D., Dragoni D., Goulden M., Granier A., Kutsch W.L., Linder S., Matteucci G., Moors E., Munger J.W., Pilegaard K., Saunders M., Falge E. M. (literal)
Pagina inizio
  • 1 (literal)
Pagina fine
  • 13 (literal)
Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#numeroVolume
  • 23 (literal)
Rivista
Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#note
  • GB3009 (1-13) (doi:10.1029/2008GB003377, 2009). (literal)
Note
  • ISI Web of Science (WOS) (literal)
Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#affiliazioni
  • [Luyssaert, S.; Janssens, I. A.] Univ Antwerp, Dept Biol, B-2610 Antwerp, Belgium [Dragoni, D.] Indiana Univ, Dept Geog, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA [Falge, E. M.] Max Planck Inst Chem, D-55128 Mainz, Germany [Goulden, M. L.] Univ Calif Irvine, Dept Ecol & Evolutionary Biol, Irvine, CA 92697 USA [Granier, A.] UMR INRA UHP, Forest Ecol & Ecophysiol Unit, F-54280 Champenoux, France [Reichstein, M.; Schulze, E. -D.; Kutsch, W. L.] Max Planck Inst Biogeochem, D-07701 Jena, Germany [Law, B. E.] Oregon State Univ, Coll Forestry, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA [Linder, S.] SLU, So Swedish Forest Res Ctr, SE-23053 Alnarp, Sweden [Matteucci, G.] CNR ISAFOM, I-87036 Arcavacata Di Rende, CS, Italy [Moors, E.] Alterra Wageningen UR, ESS CC, NL-6700 AA Wageningen, Netherlands [Munger, J. W.] Harvard Univ, Dept Earth & Planetary Sci, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA [Papale, D.] Univ Tuscia, Dept Forest Environm Sci & Resource, DISAFRI, I-01100 Viterbo, Italy [Pilegaard, K.] Tech Univ Denmark, Riso Natl Lab Sustainable Energy, Biosyst Div, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark [Saunders, M.] Natl Univ Ireland Univ Coll Dublin, Sch Biol & Environm Sci, Sci Ctr W, Dublin 4, Ireland (literal)
Titolo
  • Towards a consistency cross-check of eddy covariance flux based and biometric estimates of ecosystem carbon balance (literal)
Abstract
  • Quantification of an ecosystem's carbon balance and its components is pivotal for understanding both ecosystem functioning and global cycling. Several methods are being applied in parallel to estimate the different components of the CO(2) balance. However, different methods are subject to different sources of error. Therefore, it is necessary that site level component estimates are cross-checked against each other before being reported. Here we present a two-step approach for testing the accuracy and consistency of eddy covariance-based gross primary production (GPP) and ecosystem respiration (Re) estimates with biometric measurements of net primary production (NPP), autotrophic (Ra) and heterotrophic (Rh) respiration. The test starts with closing the CO(2) balance to account for reasonable errors in each of the component fluxes. Failure to do so within the constraints will classify the flux estimates on the site level as inconsistent. If the CO(2) balance can be closed, the test continues by comparing the closed site level Ra/GPP with the Rh/GPP ratio. The consistency of these ratios is then judged against expert knowledge. Flux estimates of sites that pass both steps are considered consistent. An inconsistent ratio is not necessarily incorrect but provides a signal for careful data screening that may require further analysis to identify the possible biological reasons of the unexpected ratios. We reviewed the literature and found 16 sites, out of a total of 529 research forest sites, that met the data requirements for the consistency test. Thirteen of these sites passed both steps of the consistency cross-check. Subsequently, flux ratios (NPP/GPP, Rh/NPP, Rh/Re, and Re/GPP) were calculated for the consistent sites. Similar ratios were observed at sites which lacked information to check consistency, indicating that the flux data that are currently used for validating models and testing ecological hypotheses are largely consistent across a wide range of site productivities. Confidence in the output of flux networks could be further enhanced if the required fluxes are independently estimated at all sites for multiple years and harmonized methods are used. (literal)
Prodotto di
Autore CNR
Insieme di parole chiave

Incoming links:


Prodotto
Autore CNR di
Http://www.cnr.it/ontology/cnr/pubblicazioni.owl#rivistaDi
Insieme di parole chiave di
data.CNR.it