A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity: Results from the north American carbon program site synthesis

Kevin Schaefer, Christopher R Schwalm, Chris Williams, M. Altaf Arain, Alan Barr, Jing M. Chen, Kenneth J. Davis, Dimitre Dimitrov, Timothy W. Hilton, David Y. Hollinger, Elyn Humphreys, Benjamin Poulter, Brett M. Raczka, Andrew D. Richardson, Alok Sahoo, Peter Thornton, Rodrigo Vargas, Hans Verbeeck, Ryan Anderson, Ian BakerT. Andrew Black, Paul Bolstad, Jiquan Chen, Peter S. Curtis, Ankur R. Desai, Michael Dietze, Danilo Dragoni, Christopher Gough, Robert F. Grant, Lianhong Gu, Atul Jain, Chris Kucharik, Beverly Law, Shuguang Liu, Erandathie Lokipitiya, Hank A. Margolis, Roser Matamala, J. Harry McCaughey, Russ Monson, J. William Munger, Walter Oechel, Changhui Peng, David T. Price, Dan Ricciuto, William J. Riley, Nigel Roulet, Hanqin Tian, Christina Tonitto, Margaret Torn, Ensheng Weng, Xiaolu Zhou

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

193 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Accurately simulating gross primary productivity (GPP) in terrestrial ecosystem models is critical because errors in simulated GPP propagate through the model to introduce additional errors in simulated biomass and other fluxes. We evaluated simulated, daily average GPP from 26 models against estimated GPP at 39 eddy covariance flux tower sites across the United States and Canada. None of the models in this study match estimated GPP within observed uncertainty. On average, models overestimate GPP in winter, spring, and fall, and underestimate GPP in summer. Models overpredicted GPP under dry conditions and for temperatures below 0°C. Improvements in simulated soil moisture and ecosystem response to drought or humidity stress will improve simulated GPP under dry conditions. Adding a low-temperature response to shut down GPP for temperatures below 0°C will reduce the positive bias in winter, spring, and fall and improve simulated phenology. The negative bias in summer and poor overall performance resulted from mismatches between simulated and observed light use efficiency (LUE). Improving simulated GPP requires better leaf-to-canopy scaling and better values of model parameters that control the maximum potential GPP, such as εmax (LUE), Vcmax (unstressed Rubisco catalytic capacity) or Jmax (the maximum electron transport rate).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numberG03010
JournalJournal of Geophysical Research E: Planets
Volume117
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2012

Fingerprint

productivity
primary productivity
Carbon
Productivity
synthesis
carbon
light use efficiency
ecosystems
Ecosystems
winter
summer
comparison
programme
phenology
Fluxes
Ribulose-Bisphosphate Carboxylase
drought
temperature
soil ecosystem
ecosystem response

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Soil Science
  • Forestry
  • Water Science and Technology
  • Palaeontology
  • Atmospheric Science
  • Aquatic Science
  • Ecology

Cite this

A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity : Results from the north American carbon program site synthesis. / Schaefer, Kevin; Schwalm, Christopher R; Williams, Chris; Arain, M. Altaf; Barr, Alan; Chen, Jing M.; Davis, Kenneth J.; Dimitrov, Dimitre; Hilton, Timothy W.; Hollinger, David Y.; Humphreys, Elyn; Poulter, Benjamin; Raczka, Brett M.; Richardson, Andrew D.; Sahoo, Alok; Thornton, Peter; Vargas, Rodrigo; Verbeeck, Hans; Anderson, Ryan; Baker, Ian; Black, T. Andrew; Bolstad, Paul; Chen, Jiquan; Curtis, Peter S.; Desai, Ankur R.; Dietze, Michael; Dragoni, Danilo; Gough, Christopher; Grant, Robert F.; Gu, Lianhong; Jain, Atul; Kucharik, Chris; Law, Beverly; Liu, Shuguang; Lokipitiya, Erandathie; Margolis, Hank A.; Matamala, Roser; McCaughey, J. Harry; Monson, Russ; Munger, J. William; Oechel, Walter; Peng, Changhui; Price, David T.; Ricciuto, Dan; Riley, William J.; Roulet, Nigel; Tian, Hanqin; Tonitto, Christina; Torn, Margaret; Weng, Ensheng; Zhou, Xiaolu.

In: Journal of Geophysical Research E: Planets, Vol. 117, No. 3, G03010, 2012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Schaefer, K, Schwalm, CR, Williams, C, Arain, MA, Barr, A, Chen, JM, Davis, KJ, Dimitrov, D, Hilton, TW, Hollinger, DY, Humphreys, E, Poulter, B, Raczka, BM, Richardson, AD, Sahoo, A, Thornton, P, Vargas, R, Verbeeck, H, Anderson, R, Baker, I, Black, TA, Bolstad, P, Chen, J, Curtis, PS, Desai, AR, Dietze, M, Dragoni, D, Gough, C, Grant, RF, Gu, L, Jain, A, Kucharik, C, Law, B, Liu, S, Lokipitiya, E, Margolis, HA, Matamala, R, McCaughey, JH, Monson, R, Munger, JW, Oechel, W, Peng, C, Price, DT, Ricciuto, D, Riley, WJ, Roulet, N, Tian, H, Tonitto, C, Torn, M, Weng, E & Zhou, X 2012, 'A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity: Results from the north American carbon program site synthesis', Journal of Geophysical Research E: Planets, vol. 117, no. 3, G03010. https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JG001960
Schaefer, Kevin ; Schwalm, Christopher R ; Williams, Chris ; Arain, M. Altaf ; Barr, Alan ; Chen, Jing M. ; Davis, Kenneth J. ; Dimitrov, Dimitre ; Hilton, Timothy W. ; Hollinger, David Y. ; Humphreys, Elyn ; Poulter, Benjamin ; Raczka, Brett M. ; Richardson, Andrew D. ; Sahoo, Alok ; Thornton, Peter ; Vargas, Rodrigo ; Verbeeck, Hans ; Anderson, Ryan ; Baker, Ian ; Black, T. Andrew ; Bolstad, Paul ; Chen, Jiquan ; Curtis, Peter S. ; Desai, Ankur R. ; Dietze, Michael ; Dragoni, Danilo ; Gough, Christopher ; Grant, Robert F. ; Gu, Lianhong ; Jain, Atul ; Kucharik, Chris ; Law, Beverly ; Liu, Shuguang ; Lokipitiya, Erandathie ; Margolis, Hank A. ; Matamala, Roser ; McCaughey, J. Harry ; Monson, Russ ; Munger, J. William ; Oechel, Walter ; Peng, Changhui ; Price, David T. ; Ricciuto, Dan ; Riley, William J. ; Roulet, Nigel ; Tian, Hanqin ; Tonitto, Christina ; Torn, Margaret ; Weng, Ensheng ; Zhou, Xiaolu. / A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity : Results from the north American carbon program site synthesis. In: Journal of Geophysical Research E: Planets. 2012 ; Vol. 117, No. 3.
@article{97ae9da0133b4a95bfee116ed22a30d6,
title = "A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity: Results from the north American carbon program site synthesis",
abstract = "Accurately simulating gross primary productivity (GPP) in terrestrial ecosystem models is critical because errors in simulated GPP propagate through the model to introduce additional errors in simulated biomass and other fluxes. We evaluated simulated, daily average GPP from 26 models against estimated GPP at 39 eddy covariance flux tower sites across the United States and Canada. None of the models in this study match estimated GPP within observed uncertainty. On average, models overestimate GPP in winter, spring, and fall, and underestimate GPP in summer. Models overpredicted GPP under dry conditions and for temperatures below 0°C. Improvements in simulated soil moisture and ecosystem response to drought or humidity stress will improve simulated GPP under dry conditions. Adding a low-temperature response to shut down GPP for temperatures below 0°C will reduce the positive bias in winter, spring, and fall and improve simulated phenology. The negative bias in summer and poor overall performance resulted from mismatches between simulated and observed light use efficiency (LUE). Improving simulated GPP requires better leaf-to-canopy scaling and better values of model parameters that control the maximum potential GPP, such as εmax (LUE), Vcmax (unstressed Rubisco catalytic capacity) or Jmax (the maximum electron transport rate).",
author = "Kevin Schaefer and Schwalm, {Christopher R} and Chris Williams and Arain, {M. Altaf} and Alan Barr and Chen, {Jing M.} and Davis, {Kenneth J.} and Dimitre Dimitrov and Hilton, {Timothy W.} and Hollinger, {David Y.} and Elyn Humphreys and Benjamin Poulter and Raczka, {Brett M.} and Richardson, {Andrew D.} and Alok Sahoo and Peter Thornton and Rodrigo Vargas and Hans Verbeeck and Ryan Anderson and Ian Baker and Black, {T. Andrew} and Paul Bolstad and Jiquan Chen and Curtis, {Peter S.} and Desai, {Ankur R.} and Michael Dietze and Danilo Dragoni and Christopher Gough and Grant, {Robert F.} and Lianhong Gu and Atul Jain and Chris Kucharik and Beverly Law and Shuguang Liu and Erandathie Lokipitiya and Margolis, {Hank A.} and Roser Matamala and McCaughey, {J. Harry} and Russ Monson and Munger, {J. William} and Walter Oechel and Changhui Peng and Price, {David T.} and Dan Ricciuto and Riley, {William J.} and Nigel Roulet and Hanqin Tian and Christina Tonitto and Margaret Torn and Ensheng Weng and Xiaolu Zhou",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1029/2012JG001960",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "117",
journal = "Journal of Geophysical Research",
issn = "0148-0227",
publisher = "American Geophysical Union",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A model-data comparison of gross primary productivity

T2 - Results from the north American carbon program site synthesis

AU - Schaefer, Kevin

AU - Schwalm, Christopher R

AU - Williams, Chris

AU - Arain, M. Altaf

AU - Barr, Alan

AU - Chen, Jing M.

AU - Davis, Kenneth J.

AU - Dimitrov, Dimitre

AU - Hilton, Timothy W.

AU - Hollinger, David Y.

AU - Humphreys, Elyn

AU - Poulter, Benjamin

AU - Raczka, Brett M.

AU - Richardson, Andrew D.

AU - Sahoo, Alok

AU - Thornton, Peter

AU - Vargas, Rodrigo

AU - Verbeeck, Hans

AU - Anderson, Ryan

AU - Baker, Ian

AU - Black, T. Andrew

AU - Bolstad, Paul

AU - Chen, Jiquan

AU - Curtis, Peter S.

AU - Desai, Ankur R.

AU - Dietze, Michael

AU - Dragoni, Danilo

AU - Gough, Christopher

AU - Grant, Robert F.

AU - Gu, Lianhong

AU - Jain, Atul

AU - Kucharik, Chris

AU - Law, Beverly

AU - Liu, Shuguang

AU - Lokipitiya, Erandathie

AU - Margolis, Hank A.

AU - Matamala, Roser

AU - McCaughey, J. Harry

AU - Monson, Russ

AU - Munger, J. William

AU - Oechel, Walter

AU - Peng, Changhui

AU - Price, David T.

AU - Ricciuto, Dan

AU - Riley, William J.

AU - Roulet, Nigel

AU - Tian, Hanqin

AU - Tonitto, Christina

AU - Torn, Margaret

AU - Weng, Ensheng

AU - Zhou, Xiaolu

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Accurately simulating gross primary productivity (GPP) in terrestrial ecosystem models is critical because errors in simulated GPP propagate through the model to introduce additional errors in simulated biomass and other fluxes. We evaluated simulated, daily average GPP from 26 models against estimated GPP at 39 eddy covariance flux tower sites across the United States and Canada. None of the models in this study match estimated GPP within observed uncertainty. On average, models overestimate GPP in winter, spring, and fall, and underestimate GPP in summer. Models overpredicted GPP under dry conditions and for temperatures below 0°C. Improvements in simulated soil moisture and ecosystem response to drought or humidity stress will improve simulated GPP under dry conditions. Adding a low-temperature response to shut down GPP for temperatures below 0°C will reduce the positive bias in winter, spring, and fall and improve simulated phenology. The negative bias in summer and poor overall performance resulted from mismatches between simulated and observed light use efficiency (LUE). Improving simulated GPP requires better leaf-to-canopy scaling and better values of model parameters that control the maximum potential GPP, such as εmax (LUE), Vcmax (unstressed Rubisco catalytic capacity) or Jmax (the maximum electron transport rate).

AB - Accurately simulating gross primary productivity (GPP) in terrestrial ecosystem models is critical because errors in simulated GPP propagate through the model to introduce additional errors in simulated biomass and other fluxes. We evaluated simulated, daily average GPP from 26 models against estimated GPP at 39 eddy covariance flux tower sites across the United States and Canada. None of the models in this study match estimated GPP within observed uncertainty. On average, models overestimate GPP in winter, spring, and fall, and underestimate GPP in summer. Models overpredicted GPP under dry conditions and for temperatures below 0°C. Improvements in simulated soil moisture and ecosystem response to drought or humidity stress will improve simulated GPP under dry conditions. Adding a low-temperature response to shut down GPP for temperatures below 0°C will reduce the positive bias in winter, spring, and fall and improve simulated phenology. The negative bias in summer and poor overall performance resulted from mismatches between simulated and observed light use efficiency (LUE). Improving simulated GPP requires better leaf-to-canopy scaling and better values of model parameters that control the maximum potential GPP, such as εmax (LUE), Vcmax (unstressed Rubisco catalytic capacity) or Jmax (the maximum electron transport rate).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84864591925&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84864591925&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1029/2012JG001960

DO - 10.1029/2012JG001960

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84864591925

VL - 117

JO - Journal of Geophysical Research

JF - Journal of Geophysical Research

SN - 0148-0227

IS - 3

M1 - G03010

ER -