Modeling the uncertainty of estimating forest carbon stocks in China
Author:
Yue T. X.,Wang Y. F.,Du Z. P.,Zhao M. W.,Zhang L. L.,Zhao N.,Lu M.,Larocque G. R.,Wilson J. P.
Abstract
Abstract. Earth surface systems are controlled by a combination of global and local factors, which cannot be understood without accounting for both the local and global components. The system dynamics cannot be recovered from the global or local controls alone. Ground forest inventory is able to accurately estimate forest carbon stocks at sample plots, but these sample plots are too sparse to support the spatial simulation of carbon stocks with required accuracy. Satellite observation is an important source of global information for the simulation of carbon stocks. Satellite remote-sensing can supply spatially continuous information about the surface of forest carbon stocks, which is impossible from ground-based investigations, but their description has considerable uncertainty. In this paper, we validated the Lund-Potsdam-Jena dynamic global vegetation model (LPJ), the Kriging method for spatial interpolation of ground sample plots and a satellite-observation-based approach as well as an approach for fusing the ground sample plots with satellite observations and an assimilation method for incorporating the ground sample plots into LPJ. The validation results indicated that both the data fusion and data assimilation approaches reduced the uncertainty of estimating carbon stocks. The data fusion had the lowest uncertainty by using an existing method for high accuracy surface modeling to fuse the ground sample plots with the satellite observations (HASM-SOA). The estimates produced with HASM-SOA were 26.1 and 28.4 % more accurate than the satellite-based approach and spatial interpolation of the sample plots, respectively. Forest carbon stocks of 7.08 Pg were estimated for China during the period from 2004 to 2008, an increase of 2.24 Pg from 1984 to 2008, using the preferred HASM-SOA method.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference96 articles.
1. Ahlstroem, A., Schurgers, G., Arneth, A., and Smith, B.: Robustness and uncertainty in terrestrial ecosystem carbon response to CMIP5 climate change projections, Environ. Res. Lett., 7, 044008, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044008, 2012. 2. Alvarez, E., Duque, A., Saldarriaga, J., Cabrera, K., de las Salas, G., del Valle, I., Lema, A., Moreno, F., Orrego, S., and Rodriguez, L.: Tree above-ground biomass allometries for carbon stocks estimation in the natural forests of Colombia, Forest Ecol. Manag., 267, 297–308, 2012. 3. Apps, M. J., Kurz, W. A., Luxmoore, R. J., Nilsson, L. O., Sedjo, R. A., Schmidt, R., Simpson, L. G., and Vinson, T. S.: Boreal forests and tundra, Water Air Soil Poll., 70, 39–53, 1993. 4. Barman, R., Jain, A. K., and Liang, M. L.: Climate-driven uncertainties in modeling terrestrial gross primary production: a site level to global-scale analysis, Glob. Change Biol., 20, 1394–1411, 2014. 5. Bradshaw, C. J. A. and Warkentin, I. G.: Global estimates of boreal forest carbon stocks and flux, Global Planet. Change, 128, 24–30, 2015.
|
|