Spatial representativeness of tall tower eddy covariance measurements using remote sensing and footprint analysis

2009 ◽  
Vol 149 (5) ◽  
pp. 795-807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Z. Barcza ◽  
A. Kern ◽  
L. Haszpra ◽  
N. Kljun
2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 1623-1640 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Wißkirchen ◽  
M. Tum ◽  
K. P. Günther ◽  
M. Niklaus ◽  
C. Eisfelder ◽  
...  

Abstract. In this study we compare monthly gross primary productivity (GPP) time series (2000–2007), computed for Europe with the Biosphere Energy Transfer Hydrology (BETHY/DLR) model with monthly data from the eddy covariance measurements network FLUXNET. BETHY/DLR with a spatial resolution of 1 km2 is designed for regional and continental applications (here Europe) and operated at the German Aerospace Center (DLR). It was adapted from the BETHY scheme to be driven by remote sensing data (leaf area index (LAI) and land cover information) and meteorology. Time series of LAI obtained from the CYCLOPES database are used to control the phenology of vegetation. Meteorological time series from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) are used as driver. These comprise daily information on temperature, precipitation, wind speed and radiation. Additionally, static maps such as land cover, elevation, and soil type are used. To validate our model results we used eddy covariance measurements from the FLUXNET network of 74 towers across Europe. For forest sites we found that our model predicts between 20 and 40% higher annual GPP sums. In contrast, for cropland sites BETHY/DLR results show about 18% less GPP than eddy covariance measurements. For grassland sites, between 10% more and 16% less GPP was calculated with BETHY/DLR. A mean total carbon uptake of 2.5 PgC a−1 (±0.17 PgC a−1) was found for Europe. In addition, this study reports on risks that arise from the comparison of modelled data to FLUXNET measurements and their interpretation width. Furthermore we investigate reasons for uncertainties in model results and focus here on Vmax values, and finally embed our results into a broader context of model validation studies published during the last years in order to evaluate differences or similarities in analysed error sources.


2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zutao Ouyang ◽  
Changliang Shao ◽  
Housen Chu ◽  
Richard Becker ◽  
Thomas Bridgeman ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 2457-2489 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Wißkirchen ◽  
M. Tum ◽  
K. P. Günther ◽  
M. Niklaus ◽  
C. Eisfelder ◽  
...  

Abstract. In this study we compare monthly gross primary productivity (GPP) time series (2000–2007), computed for Europe with the Biosphere Energy Transfer Hydrology (BETHY/DLR) model with monthly data from the eddy covariance measurements network FLUXNET. BETHY/DLR with a spatial resolution of 1 km2 is designed for regional and continental applications (here Europe) and operated at the German Aerospace Center (DLR). It was adapted from the BETHY scheme to be driven by remote sensing data and meteorology. Time series of Leaf Area Index (LAI) are used to control the development of vegetation. These are taken from the CYCLOPES database. Meteorological time series are used to regulate meteorological seasonality. These comprise daily information on temperature, precipitation, wind-speed and radiation. Additionally, static maps such as land cover, elevation, and soil type are used. To validate our model results we used eddy covariance measurements from the FLUXNET network of 74 towers across Europe. For forest sites we found that our model predicts between 20% and 40% higher annual GPP sums. In contrast, for cropland sites BETHY/DLR results show about 18% less GPP than eddy covariance measurements. For grassland sites, between 10% more and 16% less GPP was calculated with BETHY/DLR. A mean total carbon uptake of 2.5 Pg C yr-1 (±0.17 Pg) was found for Europe. In addition, this study states on risks that arise from the comparison of modeled data to FLUXNET measurements and their interpretation width.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sibylle K. Hassler ◽  
Peter Dietrich ◽  
Ralf Kiese ◽  
Mirko Mälicke ◽  
Matthias Mauder ◽  
...  

<p>Comparing estimates of evapotranspiration (ET) from different in-situ measurements – or between in-situ measurements and remote sensing products or modelling outputs – always entails the challenge of different scales and method-specific uncertainties. Especially when the estimates originate in different research disciplines, addressing and quantifying the various sources of uncertainty of the scaled ET values becomes a difficult task for individual researchers who are not familiar with all the methodological details.</p><p>The BRIDGET toolbox – developed within the Digital Earth project – wants to support the integration and scaling of diverse in-situ ET measurements by providing tools for storage, merging and visualisation of multi-scale and multi-sensor ET data. This requires an appropriate metadata description for the various measurements as well as an assessment of method-specific uncertainties which need to be supported by domain experts. We combine these tools in a standalone python package and also implement them in an existing virtual research environment (V-FOR-WaTer).</p><p>Our first use case defines and quantifies the various sources of uncertainty when scaling sap flow values from individual sensor measurements in a tree up to the transpiration estimate of a stand. Comparison estimates come from eddy covariance measurements, lysimeters and remote sensing products.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document