Spatiotemporal lagging of predictors improves machine learning estimates of atmosphere–forest CO2 exchange
-
Published:2023-03-02
Issue:4
Volume:20
Page:897-909
-
ISSN:1726-4189
-
Container-title:Biogeosciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Biogeosciences
Author:
Kämäräinen MattiORCID, Tuovinen Juha-PekkaORCID, Kulmala MarkkuORCID, Mammarella IvanORCID, Aalto JuhaORCID, Vekuri Henriikka, Lohila AnnaleaORCID, Lintunen Anna
Abstract
Abstract. Accurate estimates of net ecosystem CO2 exchange
(NEE) would improve the understanding of natural carbon sources and sinks and
their role in the regulation of global atmospheric carbon. In this work, we
use and compare the random forest (RF) and the gradient boosting (GB)
machine learning (ML) methods for predicting year-round 6 h NEE over
1996–2018 in a pine-dominated boreal forest in southern Finland and analyze the
predictability of NEE. Additionally, aggregation to weekly NEE values was
applied to get information about longer term behavior of the method. The
meteorological ERA5 reanalysis variables were used as predictors. Spatial
and temporal neighborhood (predictor lagging) was used to provide the models
more data to learn from, which was found to improve considerably the
accuracy of both ML approaches compared to using only the nearest grid cell
and time step. Both ML methods can explain temporal variability of NEE in
the observational site of this study with meteorological predictors, but the
GB method was more accurate. Only minor signs of overfitting could be
detected for the GB algorithm when redundant variables were included.
The accuracy of the approaches, measured mainly using cross-validated
R2 score between the model result and the observed NEE, was high,
reaching a best estimate value of 0.92 for GB and 0.88 for RF. In addition
to the standard RF approach, we recommend using GB for modeling the CO2
fluxes of the ecosystems due to its potential for better performance.
Funder
Academy of Finland Jane ja Aatos Erkon Säätiö H2020 European Research Council Maa- ja MetsätalousministeriÖ
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
Earth-Surface Processes,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference40 articles.
1. Alton, P. B.: Representativeness of global climate and vegetation by
carbon-monitoring networks; implications for estimates of gross and net
primary productivity at biome and global levels, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 290, 108017,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2020.108017, 2020. 2. Aubinet, M., Vesala, T., and Papale, D. (Eds.): Eddy Covariance: A Practical
Guide to Measurement and Data Analysis, Springer Science+Business Media
B.V, 438 pp., https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2351-1, 2012. 3. Besnard, S., Carvalhais, N., Arain, M. A., Black, A., Brede, B., Buchmann,
N., Chen, J., Clevers, J. G. P. W., Dutrieux, L. P., Gans, F., Herold, M.,
Jung, M., Kosugi, Y., Knohl, A., Bewerly, L. E., Paul-Limoges, E., Lohila,
A., Merbold, L., Roupsard, O., Valentini, R., Wolf, S., Zhang, X., and
Reichstein, M.: Memory effects of climate and vegetation affecting net
ecosystem CO2 fluxes in global forests, PLoS One, 14, e0213467,
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211510, 2019. 4. Bodesheim, P., Jung, M., Gans, F., Mahecha, M. D., and Reichstein, M.: Upscaled diurnal cycles of land–atmosphere fluxes: a new global half-hourly data product, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 1327–1365, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-1327-2018, 2018. 5. Bradshaw, C. J. A. and Warkentin, I. G.: Global estimates of boreal forest
carbon stocks and flux, Global Planet. Change, 128, 24–30,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2015.02.004, 2015.
|
|