2000
DOI: 10.1093/treephys/20.2.115
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling daily gas exchange of a Douglas-fir forest: comparison of three stomatal conductance models with and without a soil water stress function

Abstract: Modeling stomatal conductance is a key element in predicting tree growth and water use at the stand scale. We compared three commonly used models of stomatal conductance, the Jarvis-Loustau, Ball-Berry and Leuning models, for their suitability for incorporating soil water stress into their formulation, and for their performance in modeling forest ecosystem fluxes. We optimized the parameters of each of the three models with sap flow and soil water content data. The optimized Ball-Berry model showed clear relat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
46
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
2
46
2
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the success of the second approach depends critically on the choice of the model comparison metric. Often the comparison metric is purely a quantitative measure of the goodness of fit, such as the coefficient of determination, R 2 , calculated through linear regression between model output and observed data [e.g., Katul et al, 2000;van Wijk et al, 2000;Moriana et al, 2002;Misson et al, 2004]. However, like the transpiration models used here, semiempirical models are often nonlinear, and all of the models included in a comparison may not use the same predictor variables, therefore, the most appropriate way to calculate R 2 uniformly for all the models is not always clear [Healy, 1984;Kvålseth, 1985;Anderson-Sprecher, 1994;Mitchell, 1997].…”
Section: Overview Of Model Comparison and Selection Approaches: Ratiomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the success of the second approach depends critically on the choice of the model comparison metric. Often the comparison metric is purely a quantitative measure of the goodness of fit, such as the coefficient of determination, R 2 , calculated through linear regression between model output and observed data [e.g., Katul et al, 2000;van Wijk et al, 2000;Moriana et al, 2002;Misson et al, 2004]. However, like the transpiration models used here, semiempirical models are often nonlinear, and all of the models included in a comparison may not use the same predictor variables, therefore, the most appropriate way to calculate R 2 uniformly for all the models is not always clear [Healy, 1984;Kvålseth, 1985;Anderson-Sprecher, 1994;Mitchell, 1997].…”
Section: Overview Of Model Comparison and Selection Approaches: Ratiomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The surrounding area is characterized by the presence of broadleaved and coniferous tree species, distributed in blocks around the tower site (Bosveld and Bouten, 2001). Within a 500 m radius it is possible to find native tree species such as beech (Fagus sylvatica L.), pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), as well as the introduced species hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla (Rafinesque) Sargent) and Japanese larch (Larix kaempferi (Lambert) Carriére) (Erisman et al, 1998;Raj et al, 2014;Su et al, 2009;Bosveld and Bouten, 2001;Tietema et al, 2002;Van Wijk et al, 2000;Weligepolage et al, 2013). Canopy heights differ between cover types depending on species and growing stage.…”
Section: Study Sitementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The topography is slightly undulating with smooth height differences (Raj et al, 2014), a well-drained soil, and a groundwater table below 40 m depth (Tiktak and Bouten, 1994). The soil texture ranges from fine sand to sandy loam (Weligepolage et al, 2012;Tietema et al, 2002;Van Wijk et al, 2000).…”
Section: Study Sitementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Canopy photosynthesis was estimated from LAI and leaf-level photosynthesis (Sellers et al, 1992). The latter was described using the model developed by Farquhar et al (1980) for both carboxylation and electron transport processes together with a stomatal conductance model (Leuning, 1995;Van Wijk et al, 2000;Chang, 2012). See Wu et al (2009) for more details.…”
Section: Model Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%