4.7 Review

Large-scale estimates of gross primary production on the Qinghai-Tibet plateau based on remote sensing data

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DIGITAL EARTH
Volume 11, Issue 11, Pages 1166-1183

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17538947.2017.1381192

Keywords

Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau; gross primary production; EC-LUE model; eddy covariance; light use efficiency

Funding

  1. Key Project of Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) [KJZD-EW-G03-04]
  2. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFA0604801]
  3. One Hundred Person Project of CAS [Y329k71002]
  4. National Science Foundation for Excellent Young Scholars of China [41322005]
  5. CAS Interdisciplinary Innovation Team of the Chinese Academy of Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Vegetation gross primary production (GPP) is an important variable for the carbon cycle on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau (QTP). Based on the measurements from 12 eddy covariance flux sites, we validated a light use efficiency model (i.e. EC-LUE) to evaluate the spatial-temporal patterns of GPP and the effect of environmental variables on QTP. In general, EC-LUE model performed well in predicting GPP at different time scale over QTP. Annual GPP over the entire QTP ranged from 575 to 703 Tg C, and showed a significantly increasing trend from 1982 to 2013. However, there were large spatial heterogeneities in long-term trends of GPP. Throughout the entire QTP, air temperature increase had a greater influence than solar radiation and precipitation (PREC) changes on productivity. Moreover, our results highlight the large uncertainties of previous GPP estimates due to insufficient parameterization and validations. When compared with GPP estimates of the EC-LUE model, most Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) GPP products overestimate the magnitude and increasing trends of regional GPP, which potentially impact the feedback of ecosystems to regional climate changes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available