Bayesian integration of flux tower data into a process-based simulator for quantifying uncertainty in simulated output
-
Published:2018-01-09
Issue:1
Volume:11
Page:83-101
-
ISSN:1991-9603
-
Container-title:Geoscientific Model Development
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Geosci. Model Dev.
Author:
Raj Rahul,van der Tol Christiaan,Hamm Nicholas Alexander Samuel,Stein Alfred
Abstract
Abstract. Parameters of a process-based forest growth simulator are difficult or impossible to obtain from field observations. Reliable estimates can be obtained using calibration against observations of output and state variables. In this study, we present a Bayesian framework to calibrate the widely used process-based simulator Biome-BGC against estimates of gross primary production (GPP) data. We used GPP partitioned from flux tower measurements of a net ecosystem exchange over a 55-year-old Douglas fir stand as an example. The uncertainties of both the Biome-BGC parameters and the simulated GPP values were estimated. The calibrated parameters leaf and fine root turnover (LFRT), ratio of fine root carbon to leaf carbon (FRC : LC), ratio of carbon to nitrogen in leaf (C : Nleaf), canopy water interception coefficient (Wint), fraction of leaf nitrogen in RuBisCO (FLNR), and effective soil rooting depth (SD) characterize the photosynthesis and carbon and nitrogen allocation in the forest. The calibration improved the root mean square error and enhanced Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency between simulated and flux tower daily GPP compared to the uncalibrated Biome-BGC. Nevertheless, the seasonal cycle for flux tower GPP was not reproduced exactly and some overestimation in spring and underestimation in summer remained after calibration. We hypothesized that the phenology exhibited a seasonal cycle that was not accurately reproduced by the simulator. We investigated this by calibrating the Biome-BGC to each month's flux tower GPP separately. As expected, the simulated GPP improved, but the calibrated parameter values suggested that the seasonal cycle of state variables in the simulator could be improved. It was concluded that the Bayesian framework for calibration can reveal features of the modelled physical processes and identify aspects of the process simulator that are too rigid.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference61 articles.
1. Bastin, L., Cornford, D., Jones, R., Heuvelink, G. B. M., Pebesma, E., Stasch, C., Nativi, S., Mazzetti, P., and Williams, M.: Managing uncertainty in integrated environmental modelling: The UncertWeb framework, Environ. Model. Softw., 39, 116–134, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.02.008, 2013. 2. Braakhekke, M. C., Wutzler, T., Beer, C., Kattge, J., Schrumpf, M., Ahrens, B., Schöning, I., Hoosbeek, M. R., Kruijt, B., Kabat, P., and Reichstein, M.: Modeling the vertical soil organic matter profile using Bayesian parameter estimation, Biogeosciences, 10, 399–420, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-399-2013, 2013. 3. Churkina, G. and Running, S. W.: Contrasting climatic controls on the estimated productivity of global terrestrial biomes, Ecosystems, 1, 206–215, 1998. 4. Collalti, A., Marconi, S., Ibrom, A., Trotta, C., Anav, A., D'Andrea, E., Matteucci, G., Montagnani, L., Gielen, B., Mammarella, I., Grünwald, T., Knohl, A., Berninger, F., Zhao, Y., Valentini, R., and Santini, M.: Validation of 3D-CMCC Forest Ecosystem Model (v.5.1) against eddy covariance data for 10 European forest sites, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 479–504, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-479-2016, 2016. 5. Constable, J. V. H. and Friend, A. L.: Suitability of process-based tree growth models for addressing tree response to climate change, Environ. Pollut., 110, 47–59, 2000.
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|