| Literature DB >> 27186455 |
Yuandong Wang1, Xuguang Tang2, Lianfang Yu3, Xiyong Hou4, J William Munger5.
Abstract
Quantification of net ecosystem carbon exchange (NEE) between the atmosphere and vegetation is of great importance for regional and global studies of carbon balance. The eddy covariance technique can quantify carbon budgets and the effects of environmental controls for many forest types across the continent but it only provides integrated CO2 flux measurements within tower footprints and need to be scaled up to large areas in combination with remote sensing observations. In this study we compare a multiple-linear regression (MR) model which relates enhanced vegetation index and land surface temperature derived from the moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS), and photosynthetically active radiation with the site-level NEE, for estimating carbon flux exchange between the ecosystem and the environment at the deciduous-dominated Harvard Forest to three other methods proposed in the literature. Six years (2001-2006) of eddy covariance and MODIS data are used and results show that the MR model has the best performance for both training (2001-2004, R (2) = 0.84, RMSE = 1.33 g Cm(-2) day(-1)) and validation (2005-2006, R (2) = 0.76, RMSE = 1.54 g Cm(-2) day(-1)) datasets comparing to the other ones. It provides the potential to estimate carbon flux exchange across different ecosystems at various time intervals for scaling up plot-level NEE of CO2 to large spatial areas.Entities:
Keywords: EVI; Eddy covariance; LST; MODIS; NEE; PAR
Year: 2016 PMID: 27186455 PMCID: PMC4839024 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-2134-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Fig. 1Study area in view using MODIS image of 2009 (DOY of 121), photos were downloaded from http://atmos.seas.harvard.edu/lab/hf/hfsite.html
Correlations of NEE and ecological proxies PAR, VIs, LST
| NEE | PAR | EVI | LSWI | LST | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NEE | 1 | −0.67* | −0.89* | −0.47* | −0.73* |
| PAR | −0.67* | 1 | 0.66* | 0.17* | 0.74* |
| EVI | −0.89* | 0.66* | 1 | 0.43* | 0.79* |
| LSWI | −0.47* | 0.17* | 0.43* | 1 | 0.06 |
| LST | −0.73* | 0.74* | 0.79* | 0.06 | 1 |
2-tailed test of significance is used
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level
Fig. 2Seasonal dynamics of NEE, PAR, EVI, and LST in 2001–2006 at the Harvard Forest site are shown for each 8 day time interval. The horizontal axis represents week of year (WOY) from 1 to 46
Fig. 3Comparison between the MR model and the other current models for both training (2001–2004) and validation (2005–2006) datasets
Fig. 4Seasonal variations of MR predicted NEE and tower measured NEE at the Harvard Forest site during the year 2005–2006. The horizontal axis represents week of year (WOY) from 1 to 46