scholarly journals Supplementary material to "Evaluation of global terrestrial evapotranspiration by state-of-the-art approaches in remote sensing, machine learning, and land surface models"

Author(s):  
Shufen Pan ◽  
Naiqing Pan ◽  
Hanqin Tian ◽  
Pierre Friedlingstein ◽  
Stephen Sitch ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shufen Pan ◽  
Naiqing Pan ◽  
Hanqin Tian ◽  
Pierre Friedlingstein ◽  
Stephen Sitch ◽  
...  

Abstract. Evapotranspiration (ET) is a critical component in global water cycle and links terrestrial water, carbon and energy cycles. Accurate estimate of terrestrial ET is important for hydrological, meteorological, and agricultural research and applications, such as quantifying surface energy and water budgets, weather forecasting, and scheduling of irrigation. However, direct measurement of global terrestrial ET is not feasible. Here, we first gave a retrospective introduction to the basic theory and recent developments of state-of-the-art approaches for estimating global terrestrial ET, including remote sensing-based physical models, machine learning algorithms and land surface models (LSMs). Then, we utilized six remote sensing-based models (including four physical models and two machine learning algorithms) and fourteen LSMs to analyze the spatial and temporal variations in global terrestrial ET. The results showed that the mean annual global terrestrial ET ranged from 50.7 × 103 km3 yr−1(454 mm yr−1)to 75.7 × 103 km3 yr−1 (6977 mm yr−1), with the average being 65.5 × 103 km3 yr−1 (588 mm yr−1), during 1982–2011. LSMs had significant uncertainty in the ET magnitude in tropical regions especially the Amazon Basin, while remote sensing-based ET products showed larger inter-model range in arid and semi-arid regions than LSMs. LSMs and remote sensing-based physical models presented much larger inter-annual variability (IAV) of ET than machine learning algorithms in southwestern U.S. and the Southern Hemisphere, particularly in Australia. LSMs suggested stronger control of precipitation on ET IAV than remote sensing-based models. The ensemble remote sensing-based physical models and machine-learning algorithm suggested significant increasing trends in global terrestrial ET at the rate of 0.62 mm yr−2 (p  0.05), even though most of the individual LSMs reproduced the increasing trend. Moreover, all models suggested a positive effect of vegetation greening on ET intensification. Spatially, all methods showed that ET significantly increased in western and southern Africa, western India and northeastern Australia, but decreased severely in southwestern U.S., southern South America and Mongolia. Discrepancies in ET trend mainly appeared in tropical regions like the Amazon Basin. The ensemble means of the three ET categories showed generally good consistency, however, considerable uncertainties still exist in both the temporal and spatial variations in global ET estimates. The uncertainties were induced by multiple factors, including parameterization of land processes, meteorological forcing, lack of in situ measurements, remote sensing acquisition and scaling effects. Improvements in the representation of water stress and canopy dynamics are essentially needed to reduce uncertainty in LSM-simulated ET. Utilization of latest satellite sensors and deep learning methods, theoretical advancements in nonequilibrium thermodynamics, and application of integrated methods that fuse different ET estimates or relevant key biophysical variables will improve the accuracy of remote sensing-based models.


2019 ◽  
Vol 578 ◽  
pp. 124105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tongren Xu ◽  
Zhixia Guo ◽  
Youlong Xia ◽  
Vagner G. Ferreira ◽  
Shaomin Liu ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (15) ◽  
pp. 4731-4757 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronny Meier ◽  
Edouard L. Davin ◽  
Quentin Lejeune ◽  
Mathias Hauser ◽  
Yan Li ◽  
...  

Abstract. Modeling studies have shown the importance of biogeophysical effects of deforestation on local climate conditions but have also highlighted the lack of agreement across different models. Recently, remote-sensing observations have been used to assess the contrast in albedo, evapotranspiration (ET), and land surface temperature (LST) between forest and nearby open land on a global scale. These observations provide an unprecedented opportunity to evaluate the ability of land surface models to simulate the biogeophysical effects of forests. Here, we evaluate the representation of the difference of forest minus open land (i.e., grassland and cropland) in albedo, ET, and LST in the Community Land Model version 4.5 (CLM4.5) using various remote-sensing and in situ data sources. To extract the local sensitivity to land cover, we analyze plant functional type level output from global CLM4.5 simulations, using a model configuration that attributes a separate soil column to each plant functional type. Using the separated soil column configuration, CLM4.5 is able to realistically reproduce the biogeophysical contrast between forest and open land in terms of albedo, daily mean LST, and daily maximum LST, while the effect on daily minimum LST is not well captured by the model. Furthermore, we identify that the ET contrast between forests and open land is underestimated in CLM4.5 compared to observation-based products and even reversed in sign for some regions, even when considering uncertainties in these products. We then show that these biases can be partly alleviated by modifying several model parameters, such as the root distribution, the formulation of plant water uptake, the light limitation of photosynthesis, and the maximum rate of carboxylation. Furthermore, the ET contrast between forest and open land needs to be better constrained by observations to foster convergence amongst different land surface models on the biogeophysical effects of forests. Overall, this study demonstrates the potential of comparing subgrid model output to local observations to improve current land surface models' ability to simulate land cover change effects, which is a promising approach to reduce uncertainties in future assessments of land use impacts on climate.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document