Climate‐Induced Uncertainty in Modeling Gross Primary Productivity From the Light Use Efficiency Approach

Abstract Light use efficiency (LUE) models, along with satellite‐based vegetation maps and climatic reanalysis products as drivers, are effective tools for estimating large‐scale gross primary productivity (GPP). However, the climate‐induced uncertainty in LUE‐based GPP remains poorly understood, particularly the temporal scaling uncertainty from ignored climatic fluctuations. Here, two 1‐hourly reanalysis products, along with site‐based observations, were employed to drive a two‐leaf LUE model at 194 eddy‐covariance (EC) sites. The observation‐driven and reanalysis‐driven GPP at the 1‐hourly resolution were evaluated against EC GPP to illustrate the uncertainty from reanalysis products, with mean absolute deviation (MAD) and Nash‐Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) as criterion. Moreover, the climate‐induced temporal scaling uncertainty was characterized by comparing distributed GPP (modeled with 1‐hourly resolution climatic drivers) and lumped GPP (modeled with 6‐hourly resolution climatic drivers). At the 1‐hourly resolution, results demonstrated that the reanalysis‐driven GPP showed a weaker relationship with EC GPP (MAD = 0.14 gC m −2 h −1 , NSE = 0.48) than the observation‐driven GPP (MAD = 0.12 gC m −2 h −1 , NSE = 0.60), confirming the nonnegligible climate‐induced uncertainty from reanalysis products. Additionally, the climate‐induced uncertainty arising from gridded radiation was found to be significantly larger than that associated with temperature and vapor pressure deficit (VPD). At the 6‐hourly resolution, both the observation‐driven and reanalysis‐driven lumped GPP exhibited a lower relationship with EC GPP (MAD = 0.63 gC m −2 6h −1 , NSE = 0.54) than the corresponding distributed GPP (MAD = 0.57 gC m −2 6h −1 , NSE = 0.59), demonstrating that the climate‐induced temporal scaling uncertainty in 6‐hourly GPP estimates was significantly apparent. This study emphasizes the imperative to refine reanalysis products for more precise capture of short‐term fluctuations and to reduce scaling uncertainties in coarse temporal resolution GPP estimates.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1029/2024jg008394
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Environmental Impact and Sustainability
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.82

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Climate‐Induced Uncertainty in Modeling Gross Primary Productivity From the Light Use Efficiency Approach

Tao Yang, Wei Zhao, Xiaobin Guan, Changlin Wu et al.
4 citations
Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences
Environmental Impact and Sustainability
0.82
article

Climate‐Induced Uncertainty in Modeling Gross Primary Productivity From the Light Use Efficiency Approach

Tao Yang, Wei Zhao, Xiaobin Guan, Changlin Wu, Jiyan Wang, Xinyao Xie, Yong Wang
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Abstract Light use efficiency (LUE) models, along with satellite‐based vegetation maps and climatic reanalysis products as drivers, are effective tools for estimating large‐scale gross primary productivity (GPP). However, the climate‐induced uncertainty in LUE‐based GPP remains poorly understood, particularly the temporal scaling uncertainty from ignored climatic fluctuations. Here, two 1‐hourly reanalysis products, along with site‐based observations, were employed to drive a two‐leaf LUE model at 194 eddy‐covariance (EC) sites. The observation‐driven and reanalysis‐driven GPP at the 1‐hourly resolution were evaluated against EC GPP to illustrate the uncertainty from reanalysis products, with mean absolute deviation (MAD) and Nash‐Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) as criterion. Moreover, the climate‐induced temporal scaling uncertainty was characterized by comparing distributed GPP (modeled with 1‐hourly resolution climatic drivers) and lumped GPP (modeled with 6‐hourly resolution climatic drivers). At the 1‐hourly resolution, results demonstrated that the reanalysis‐driven GPP showed a weaker relationship with EC GPP (MAD = 0.14 gC m −2 h −1 , NSE = 0.48) than the observation‐driven GPP (MAD = 0.12 gC m −2 h −1 , NSE = 0.60), confirming the nonnegligible climate‐induced uncertainty from reanalysis products. Additionally, the climate‐induced uncertainty arising from gridded radiation was found to be significantly larger than that associated with temperature and vapor pressure deficit (VPD). At the 6‐hourly resolution, both the observation‐driven and reanalysis‐driven lumped GPP exhibited a lower relationship with EC GPP (MAD = 0.63 gC m −2 6h −1 , NSE = 0.54) than the corresponding distributed GPP (MAD = 0.57 gC m −2 6h −1 , NSE = 0.59), demonstrating that the climate‐induced temporal scaling uncertainty in 6‐hourly GPP estimates was significantly apparent. This study emphasizes the imperative to refine reanalysis products for more precise capture of short‐term fluctuations and to reduce scaling uncertainties in coarse temporal resolution GPP estimates.

Journal of Geophysical Research BiogeosciencesVol. 129(10)
Southwest Petroleum University (CN), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN), Wuhan University (CN), Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment (CN)
Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 30%
Environmental Impact and Sustainability
0.82
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.