IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v220y2009i23p3259-3270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple sources of predictive uncertainty in modeled estimates of net ecosystem CO2 exchange

Author

Listed:
  • Mitchell, Stephen
  • Beven, Keith
  • Freer, Jim

Abstract

Net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE) is typically measured directly by eddy covariance towers or is estimated by ecosystem process models, yet comparisons between the data obtained by these two methods can show poor correspondence. There are three potential explanations for this discrepancy. First, estimates of NEE as measured by the eddy-covariance technique are laden with uncertainty and can potentially provide a poor baseline for models to be tested against. Second, there could be fundamental problems in model structure that prevent an accurate simulation of NEE. Third, ecosystem process models are dependent on ecophysiological parameter sets derived from field measurements in which a single parameter for a given species can vary considerably. The latter problem suggests that with such broad variation among multiple inputs, any ecosystem modeling scheme must account for the possibility that many combinations of apparently feasible parameter values might not allow the model to emulate the observed NEE dynamics of a terrestrial ecosystem, as well as the possibility that there may be many parameter sets within a particular model structure that can successfully reproduce the observed data. We examined the extent to which these three issues influence estimates of NEE in a widely used ecosystem process model, Biome-BGC, by adapting the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) methodology. This procedure involved 400,000 model runs, each with randomly generated parameter values from a uniform distribution based on published parameter ranges, resulting in estimates of NEE that were compared to daily NEE data from young and mature Ponderosa pine stands at Metolius, Oregon. Of the 400,000 simulations run with different parameter sets for each age class (800,000 total), over 99% of the simulations underestimated the magnitude of net ecosystem CO2 exchange, with only 4.07% and 0.045% of all simulations providing satisfactory simulations of the field data for the young and mature stands, even when uncertainties in eddy-covariance measurements are accounted for. Results indicate fundamental shortcomings in the ability of this model to produce realistic carbon flux data over the course of forest development, and we suspect that much of the mismatch derives from an inability to realistically model ecosystem respiration. However, difficulties in estimating historic climate data are also a cause for model-data mismatch, particularly in a highly ecotonal region such as central Oregon. This latter difficulty may be less prevalent in other ecosystems, but it nonetheless highlights a challenge in trying to develop a dynamic representation of the terrestrial biosphere.

Suggested Citation

  • Mitchell, Stephen & Beven, Keith & Freer, Jim, 2009. "Multiple sources of predictive uncertainty in modeled estimates of net ecosystem CO2 exchange," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(23), pages 3259-3270.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:220:y:2009:i:23:p:3259-3270
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.08.021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380009006000
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.08.021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Piñol, Josep & Castellnou, Marc & Beven, Keith J., 2007. "Conditioning uncertainty in ecological models: Assessing the impact of fire management strategies," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 34-44.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Govind, Ajit & Chen, Jing Ming & Bernier, Pierre & Margolis, Hank & Guindon, Luc & Beaudoin, Andre, 2011. "Spatially distributed modeling of the long-term carbon balance of a boreal landscape," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(15), pages 2780-2795.
    2. Ma, Shaoxiu & Churkina, Galina & Wieland, Ralf & Gessler, Arthur, 2011. "Optimization and evaluation of the ANTHRO-BGC model for winter crops in Europe," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(20), pages 3662-3679.
    3. Ortiz, Carina & Karltun, Erik & Stendahl, Johan & Gärdenäs, Annemieke I. & Ågren, Göran I., 2011. "Modelling soil carbon development in Swedish coniferous forest soils—An uncertainty analysis of parameters and model estimates using the GLUE method," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(17), pages 3020-3032.
    4. Garcia, Elizabeth S. & Tague, Christina L. & Choate, Janet S., 2016. "Uncertainty in carbon allocation strategy and ecophysiological parameterization influences on carbon and streamflow estimates for two western US forested watersheds," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 342(C), pages 19-33.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Varela, Elsa & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Soliño, Mario, 2014. "Understanding the heterogeneity of social preferences for fire prevention management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 91-104.
    2. Piñol, Josep & Espadaler, Xavier & Pérez, Nicolás & Beven, Keith, 2009. "Testing a new model of aphid abundance with sedentary and non-sedentary predators," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(19), pages 2469-2480.
    3. Turley, Marianne C. & Ford, E. David, 2009. "Definition and calculation of uncertainty in ecological process models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(17), pages 1968-1983.
    4. Lasse Loepfe & Jordi Martinez-Vilalta & Josep Piñol, 2012. "Management alternatives to offset climate change effects on Mediterranean fire regimes in NE Spain," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 693-707, December.
    5. Thomas Curt & Thibaut Frejaville, 2018. "Wildfire Policy in Mediterranean France: How Far is it Efficient and Sustainable?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(3), pages 472-488, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:220:y:2009:i:23:p:3259-3270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.