2010
DOI: 10.5194/bg-7-2061-2010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multi-model analysis of terrestrial carbon cycles in Japan: limitations and implications of model calibration using eddy flux observations

Abstract: Abstract. Terrestrial biosphere models show large differences when simulating carbon and water cycles, and reducing these differences is a priority for developing more accurate estimates of the condition of terrestrial ecosystems and future climate change. To reduce uncertainties and improve the understanding of their carbon budgets, we investigated the utility of the eddy flux datasets to improve model simulations and reduce variabilities among multi-model outputs of terrestrial biosphere models in Japan. Usi… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
34
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
2
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Details of VISIT are described in Appendix A. The VISIT model has been modified by using flux tower data obtained from the AsiaFlux database, including the middle-aged larch forest at the Tomakomai site and mature mixed forest at the Teshio site, and carbon fluxes simulated with the amended model have shown good agreement with the observed values (Ito, 2008;Ichii et al, 2010Ichii et al, , 2013. However, the VISIT model has not been validated for young forests during the initial stage of growth.…”
Section: Model Applicationmentioning
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Details of VISIT are described in Appendix A. The VISIT model has been modified by using flux tower data obtained from the AsiaFlux database, including the middle-aged larch forest at the Tomakomai site and mature mixed forest at the Teshio site, and carbon fluxes simulated with the amended model have shown good agreement with the observed values (Ito, 2008;Ichii et al, 2010Ichii et al, , 2013. However, the VISIT model has not been validated for young forests during the initial stage of growth.…”
Section: Model Applicationmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The VISIT model has been validated by using several flux data sets covering tropical to subarctic biomes, including mature mixed forest in Teshio and middle-aged larch forest in Tomakomai (Ito, 2008;Ichii et al, 2010Ichii et al, , 2013. In these studies, the parameters in Table A1 were determined manually by using a trial-and-error method to fit the output values of NEP, GPP, RE, NPP, and biomass to those derived from observation.…”
Section: R Hirata Et Al: Impact Of Climate Variation and Disturbancesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Site-level measurements of ecosystem-atmosphere exchange, albeit covering footprints between ∼10 4 to 10 6 m 2 , essentially remain point measurements from a global Earth-system perspective. However, combining these flux observations with information from remote-sensing and gridded meteorological drivers via statistical machine-learning approaches (data-driven up-scaling) has allowed us to infer continental-to-global fields of ecosystem functions [gross primary production (GPP) and evapotranspiration (ET)] in recent years (11,12,16,17,(34)(35)(36). The seasonal and spatial variation of quantities such as GPP, ET, and sensible heat flux (H) can be estimated with very good performance (r 2 > 0.6) as shown in crossvalidation exercises (17).…”
Section: Global Functional Biogeographical Knowledge and Questions Frmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used MODIS 1-km resolution subset data sets (collection 5; http://daac.ornl.gov/MODIS/), each of which consisted of 7 × 7-km regions centered on the flux towers. At each time step, we averaged the MODIS observations by only using high-quality pixels (with the mandatory quality assurance -QA -flag being good in the QA data) based on the method of Yang et al (2007) and Ichii et al (2010), and missing data were replaced by a long-term average calculated using high-quality pixels. The original eight days' composite products were converted to monthly averages during study period for each site, although LAI for TSE is that only in 2010.…”
Section: Lai Data and Phenological Parametersmentioning
confidence: 99%