Publications (3)16.28 Total impact
-
Article: Terrestrial biosphere models need better representation of vegetation phenology: results from the North American Carbon Program Site Synthesis
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Phenology, by controlling the seasonal activity of vegetation on the land surface, plays a fundamental role in regulating photosynthesis and other ecosystem processes, as well as competitive interactions and feedbacks to the climate system. We conducted an analysis to evaluate the representation of phenology, and the associated seasonality of ecosystem-scale CO2 exchange, in 14 models participating in the North American Carbon Program Site Synthesis. Model predictions were evaluated using long-term measurements (emphasizing the period 20002006) from 10 forested sites within the AmeriFlux and Fluxnet-Canada networks. In deciduous forests, almost all models consistently predicted that the growing season started earlier, and ended later, than was actually observed; biases of 2 weeks or more were typical. For these sites, most models were also unable to explain more than a small fraction of the observed interannual variability in phenological transition dates. Finally, for deciduous forests, misrepresentation of the seasonal cycle resulted in over-prediction of gross ecosystem photosynthesis by +160 145 g C m-2 yr-1 during the spring transition period and +75 +/- 130 g C m-2 yr-1 during the autumn transition period (13% and 8% annual productivity, respectively) compensating for the tendency of most models to under-predict the magnitude of peak summertime photosynthetic rates. Models did a better job of predicting the seasonality of CO2 exchange for evergreen forests. These results highlight the need for improved understanding of the environmental controls on vegetation phenology and incorporation of this knowledge into better phenological models. Existing models are unlikely to predict future responses of phenology to climate change accurately and therefore will misrepresent the seasonality and interannual variability of key biosphereatmosphere feedbacks and interactions in coupled global climate models.Global Change Biology 02/2012; 18(2):566-584. · 6.86 Impact Factor -
Article: Characterizing the performance of ecosystem models across time scales: A spectral analysis of the North American Carbon Program site-level synthesis.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Ecosystem models are important tools for diagnosing the carbon cycle and projecting its behavior across space and time. Despite the fact that ecosystems respond to drivers at multiple time scales, most assessments of model performance do not discriminate different time scales. Spectral methods, such as wavelet analyses, present an alternative approach that enables the identification of the dominant time scales contributing to model performance in the frequency domain. In this study we used wavelet analyses to synthesize the performance of 21 ecosystem models at 9 eddy covariance towers as part of the North American Carbon Program's site-level intercomparison. This study expands upon previous single-site and single-model analyses to determine what patterns of model error are consistent across a diverse range of models and sites. To assess the significance of model error at different time scales, a novel Monte Carlo approach was developed to incorporate flux observation error. Failing to account for observation error leads to a misidentification of the time scales that dominate model error. These analyses show that model error (1) is largest at the annual and 20-120 day scales, (2) has a clear peak at the diurnal scale, and (3) shows large variability among models in the 2-20 day scales. Errors at the annual scale were consistent across time, diurnal errors were predominantly during the growing season, and intermediate-scale errors were largely event driven. Breaking spectra into discrete temporal bands revealed a significant model-by-band effect but also a nonsignificant model-by-site effect, which together suggest that individual models show consistency in their error patterns. Differences among models were related to model time step, soil hydrology, and the representation of photosynthesis and phenology but not the soil carbon or nitrogen cycles. These factors had the greatest impact on diurnal errors, were less important at annual scales, and had the least impact at intermediate time scales.Journal of Geophysical Research 11/2011; G04029,. · 3.02 Impact Factor -
Article: Influence of spring and autumn phenological transitions on forest ecosystem productivity
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We use eddy covariance measurements of net ecosystem productivity (NEP) from 21 FLUXNET sites (153 site-years of data) to investigate relationships between phenology and productivity (in terms of both NEP and gross ecosystem photosynthesis, GEP) in temperate and boreal forests. Results are used to evaluate the plausibility of four different conceptual models. Phenological indicators were derived from the eddy covariance time series, and from remote sensing and models. We examine spatial patterns (across sites) and temporal patterns (across years); an important conclusion is that it is likely that neither of these accurately represents how productivity will respond to future phenological shifts resulting from ongoing climate change. In spring and autumn, increased GEP resulting from an 'extra' day tends to be offset by concurrent, but smaller, increases in ecosystem respiration, and thus the effect on NEP is still positive. Spring productivity anomalies appear to have carry-over effects that translate to productivity anomalies in the following autumn, but it is not clear that these result directly from phenological anomalies. Finally, the productivity of evergreen needleleaf forests is less sensitive to phenology than is productivity of deciduous broadleaf forests. This has implications for how climate change may drive shifts in competition within mixed-species stands.Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B Biological Sciences 10/2010; 365(3246):3227-3246. · 6.40 Impact Factor
