2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09153
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improving global gross primary productivity estimation by fusing multi-source data products

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 88 publications
(105 reference statements)
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We showed that the incorporation of CI reduced the discrepancy between the modeled GPP and that of two benchmarking datasets. This indicates the potential importance of CI, although does not imply that CI necessarily improves GPP estimation because we could get the correct answer with wrong reasons due to the uncertainty of the model itself, and the benchmarking datasets (and other global GPP datasets) do not necessarily represent the truth as large uncertainties remain especially in tropical regions (Xie et al, 2020 ; Zhang & Ye, 2022 ) as well. Therefore, further comprehensive validation of the benefit of incorporating CI for GPP magnitude, seasonal variation, long‐term interannual variations, and even related causal structures (Li, Zhu, et al, 2022 ; Runge et al, 2019 ; Yuan, Zhu, Li, et al, 2022 ; Yuan, Zhu, Riley, et al, 2022 ; Yuan et al, 2021 ) is needed when more reliable global GPP and CI data are available at the same spatial scale.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We showed that the incorporation of CI reduced the discrepancy between the modeled GPP and that of two benchmarking datasets. This indicates the potential importance of CI, although does not imply that CI necessarily improves GPP estimation because we could get the correct answer with wrong reasons due to the uncertainty of the model itself, and the benchmarking datasets (and other global GPP datasets) do not necessarily represent the truth as large uncertainties remain especially in tropical regions (Xie et al, 2020 ; Zhang & Ye, 2022 ) as well. Therefore, further comprehensive validation of the benefit of incorporating CI for GPP magnitude, seasonal variation, long‐term interannual variations, and even related causal structures (Li, Zhu, et al, 2022 ; Runge et al, 2019 ; Yuan, Zhu, Li, et al, 2022 ; Yuan, Zhu, Riley, et al, 2022 ; Yuan et al, 2021 ) is needed when more reliable global GPP and CI data are available at the same spatial scale.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because Bisley does not have established flux towers, we use different global data products to benchmark ELM-FATES at the monthly time scale; all the data sets have different spatial resolutions (Table S5 in Supporting Information S1). The comparison shows limited consistency between data sets (Figure 5), implying large uncertainties (Anav et al, 2015;Sriwongsitanon et al, 2020;Zhang & Ye, 2022). Rather than perform product comparison and generating weighted GPP (e.g., Zhang & Ye, 2022) and ET products, we use the arithmetic mean of different data products.…”
Section: Using the Global Data Sets To Benchmark Elm-fates At Bisleymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The comparison shows limited consistency between data sets (Figure 5), implying large uncertainties (Anav et al, 2015;Sriwongsitanon et al, 2020;Zhang & Ye, 2022). Rather than perform product comparison and generating weighted GPP (e.g., Zhang & Ye, 2022) and ET products, we use the arithmetic mean of different data products. We show that the GPP and ET seasonality of ELM-FATES is in good agreement with that represented by the data products.…”
Section: Using the Global Data Sets To Benchmark Elm-fates At Bisleymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Candidate predictors covering climatic and biophysical variables such as vegetation type, observed temperature, precipitation, and radiation, as well as absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (FAPAR) fractions from satellites, are then used to drive the global model to derive gridded GPP estimates (Beer et al, 2010;Jung et al, 2009Jung et al, , 2011. Its uncertainties are mainly the measurement uncertainty of the eddy covariance flux, the uncertainty of the global predictor variables, and the sampling bias driven by the inhomogeneous distribution of eddy covariance flux sites, which are numerous in temperate regions and few in tropical regions (Zhang & Ye, 2022). Some GPP estimates lack consideration of the cumulative effect of soil moisture (Jung et al, 2020;Piao et al, 2013;Yao et al, 2018).…”
Section: Drivers Of Uncertainty In Gppmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additional supporting information can be found online in the Supporting Information section at the end of this article. Zhang, Y., & Ye, A. (2022).…”
Section: Ack N Owled G M Entsmentioning
confidence: 99%