METHODS. RESULTS. Introduction. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. CONCLUSIONS. Uncertainty analysis of carbon turnover time and sequestration potential in terrestrial ecosystems of the Conterminous USA. Xuhui Zhou 1 , Tao Zhou 1 , Yiqi Lu o 1
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Uncertainty analysis of carbon turnover time and sequestration potential in terrestrial ecosystems of the Conterminous USA
Xuhui Zhou1, Tao Zhou1, Yiqi Luo1
1Department of Botany and Microbiology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA
2Key laboratory of Environmental Change and Natural Disaster, Ministry of Education of China, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, P. R. China
Email Address:[email protected]
Fig. 5 Spatial patterns of ecosystem carbon turnover time (a) and its standard deviation (b).
Fig. 6 Ecosystem carbon turnover time and its SD (error bar) for 8 biomes
Fig. 7 The potential of ecosystem carbon sequestration (a, g C m-2 yr-1) and its SD (b) in 50 years as NPP increase by 0.5% per year.
Fig. 1 Inversion results showing the histograms of estimated parameters with about 40,000 samples from M-H simulation for Evergreen Needleleaf Forest (left) and Grassland (right)
Fig. 8 Ecosystem carbon sequestration and its SD (error bar) for 8 biomes (Pg C yr-1)
Fig. 3 Carbon allocation coefficients for eight biomes
Model structure (Regional TECOR) for inversion analysis of carbon turnover time. ε* is maximum light use efficiency, αL, αW, and αRare allocations of NPP to leaves, wood, and roots (three layers ξR1,ξR2, and ξR3), θF and θC are C partitioning coefficients of fine and coarse litter pools, ηis a fraction of C exiting the coarse litter pool by mechanical breakdown, τF,τC, τRi, and τSiare C turnover time in fine litter, coarse litter, roots and SOC in three layers.
Method: Bayesian probability inversion and Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) technology
Fig. 2 Comparisons between modeled and observed data for 12 data sets.
12 Data sets: NPP in leaves, stems, and roots, biomass in leaves, stems, fine litter, and roots and SOC in the three soil layers.
Fig. 4 The relationship of latitude and latitude-averaged turnover time with SD
We thank US DOE (DE-FG03-99R62800) and NSF (DEB 0092642, DEB 0444518) for financial support.