Benjamin Poulter

2023

DOI bib
Modeled production, oxidation, and transport processes of wetland methane emissions in temperate, boreal, and Arctic regions
Masahito Ueyama, Sara Knox, Kyle Delwiche, Sheel Bansal, W. J. Riley, Dennis Baldocchi, Takashi Hirano, Gavin McNicol, K. V. Schäfer, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Kuang‐Yu Chang, Jiquen Chen, Housen Chu, Ankur R. Desai, Sébastien Gogo, Hiroki Iwata, Minseok Kang, Ivan Mammarella, Matthias Peichl, Oliver Sonnentag, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Youngryel Ryu, E. S. Euskirchen, Mathias Göckede, Adrien Jacotot, Mats B. Nilsson, Torsten Sachs, Masahito Ueyama, Sara Knox, Kyle Delwiche, Sheel Bansal, W. J. Riley, Dennis Baldocchi, Takashi Hirano, Gavin McNicol, K. V. Schäfer, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Kuang‐Yu Chang, Jiquen Chen, Housen Chu, Ankur R. Desai, Sébastien Gogo, Hiroki Iwata, Minseok Kang, Ivan Mammarella, Matthias Peichl, Oliver Sonnentag, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Youngryel Ryu, E. S. Euskirchen, Mathias Göckede, Adrien Jacotot, Mats B. Nilsson, Torsten Sachs
Global Change Biology, Volume 29, Issue 8

Wetlands are the largest natural source of methane (CH4 ) to the atmosphere. The eddy covariance method provides robust measurements of net ecosystem exchange of CH4 , but interpreting its spatiotemporal variations is challenging due to the co-occurrence of CH4 production, oxidation, and transport dynamics. Here, we estimate these three processes using a data-model fusion approach across 25 wetlands in temperate, boreal, and Arctic regions. Our data-constrained model-iPEACE-reasonably reproduced CH4 emissions at 19 of the 25 sites with normalized root mean square error of 0.59, correlation coefficient of 0.82, and normalized standard deviation of 0.87. Among the three processes, CH4 production appeared to be the most important process, followed by oxidation in explaining inter-site variations in CH4 emissions. Based on a sensitivity analysis, CH4 emissions were generally more sensitive to decreased water table than to increased gross primary productivity or soil temperature. For periods with leaf area index (LAI) of ≥20% of its annual peak, plant-mediated transport appeared to be the major pathway for CH4 transport. Contributions from ebullition and diffusion were relatively high during low LAI (<20%) periods. The lag time between CH4 production and CH4 emissions tended to be short in fen sites (3 ± 2 days) and long in bog sites (13 ± 10 days). Based on a principal component analysis, we found that parameters for CH4 production, plant-mediated transport, and diffusion through water explained 77% of the variance in the parameters across the 19 sites, highlighting the importance of these parameters for predicting wetland CH4 emissions across biomes. These processes and associated parameters for CH4 emissions among and within the wetlands provide useful insights for interpreting observed net CH4 fluxes, estimating sensitivities to biophysical variables, and modeling global CH4 fluxes.

DOI bib
Modeled production, oxidation, and transport processes of wetland methane emissions in temperate, boreal, and Arctic regions
Masahito Ueyama, Sara Knox, Kyle Delwiche, Sheel Bansal, W. J. Riley, Dennis Baldocchi, Takashi Hirano, Gavin McNicol, K. V. Schäfer, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Kuang‐Yu Chang, Jiquen Chen, Housen Chu, Ankur R. Desai, Sébastien Gogo, Hiroki Iwata, Minseok Kang, Ivan Mammarella, Matthias Peichl, Oliver Sonnentag, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Youngryel Ryu, E. S. Euskirchen, Mathias Göckede, Adrien Jacotot, Mats B. Nilsson, Torsten Sachs, Masahito Ueyama, Sara Knox, Kyle Delwiche, Sheel Bansal, W. J. Riley, Dennis Baldocchi, Takashi Hirano, Gavin McNicol, K. V. Schäfer, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Kuang‐Yu Chang, Jiquen Chen, Housen Chu, Ankur R. Desai, Sébastien Gogo, Hiroki Iwata, Minseok Kang, Ivan Mammarella, Matthias Peichl, Oliver Sonnentag, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Youngryel Ryu, E. S. Euskirchen, Mathias Göckede, Adrien Jacotot, Mats B. Nilsson, Torsten Sachs
Global Change Biology, Volume 29, Issue 8

Wetlands are the largest natural source of methane (CH4 ) to the atmosphere. The eddy covariance method provides robust measurements of net ecosystem exchange of CH4 , but interpreting its spatiotemporal variations is challenging due to the co-occurrence of CH4 production, oxidation, and transport dynamics. Here, we estimate these three processes using a data-model fusion approach across 25 wetlands in temperate, boreal, and Arctic regions. Our data-constrained model-iPEACE-reasonably reproduced CH4 emissions at 19 of the 25 sites with normalized root mean square error of 0.59, correlation coefficient of 0.82, and normalized standard deviation of 0.87. Among the three processes, CH4 production appeared to be the most important process, followed by oxidation in explaining inter-site variations in CH4 emissions. Based on a sensitivity analysis, CH4 emissions were generally more sensitive to decreased water table than to increased gross primary productivity or soil temperature. For periods with leaf area index (LAI) of ≥20% of its annual peak, plant-mediated transport appeared to be the major pathway for CH4 transport. Contributions from ebullition and diffusion were relatively high during low LAI (<20%) periods. The lag time between CH4 production and CH4 emissions tended to be short in fen sites (3 ± 2 days) and long in bog sites (13 ± 10 days). Based on a principal component analysis, we found that parameters for CH4 production, plant-mediated transport, and diffusion through water explained 77% of the variance in the parameters across the 19 sites, highlighting the importance of these parameters for predicting wetland CH4 emissions across biomes. These processes and associated parameters for CH4 emissions among and within the wetlands provide useful insights for interpreting observed net CH4 fluxes, estimating sensitivities to biophysical variables, and modeling global CH4 fluxes.

DOI bib
Carbon uptake in Eurasian boreal forests dominates the high‐latitude net ecosystem carbon budget
Jennifer D. Watts, Mary Farina, John S. Kimball, Luke D. Schiferl, Zhihua Liu, Kyle A. Arndt, Donatella Zona, Ashley P. Ballantyne, E. S. Euskirchen, Frans‐Jan W. Parmentier, Manuel Helbig, Oliver Sonnentag, Torbern Tagesson, Janne Rinne, Hiroki Ikawa, Masahito Ueyama, Hideki Kobayashi, Torsten Sachs, Daniel F. Nadeau, John Kochendorfer, M. Jackowicz-Korczyński, Anna Virkkala, Mika Aurela, R. Commane, Brendan Byrne, Leah Birch, Matthew S. Johnson, Nima Madani, Brendan M. Rogers, Jinyang Du, Arthur Endsley, K. E. Savage, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Zhang, L. M. Bruhwiler, Charles E. Miller, S. J. Goetz, Walter C. Oechel, Jennifer D. Watts, Mary Farina, John S. Kimball, Luke D. Schiferl, Zhihua Liu, Kyle A. Arndt, Donatella Zona, Ashley P. Ballantyne, E. S. Euskirchen, Frans‐Jan W. Parmentier, Manuel Helbig, Oliver Sonnentag, Torbern Tagesson, Janne Rinne, Hiroki Ikawa, Masahito Ueyama, Hideki Kobayashi, Torsten Sachs, Daniel F. Nadeau, John Kochendorfer, M. Jackowicz-Korczyński, Anna Virkkala, Mika Aurela, R. Commane, Brendan Byrne, Leah Birch, Matthew S. Johnson, Nima Madani, Brendan M. Rogers, Jinyang Du, Arthur Endsley, K. E. Savage, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Zhang, L. M. Bruhwiler, Charles E. Miller, S. J. Goetz, Walter C. Oechel
Global Change Biology, Volume 29, Issue 7

Arctic-boreal landscapes are experiencing profound warming, along with changes in ecosystem moisture status and disturbance from fire. This region is of global importance in terms of carbon feedbacks to climate, yet the sign (sink or source) and magnitude of the Arctic-boreal carbon budget within recent years remains highly uncertain. Here, we provide new estimates of recent (2003-2015) vegetation gross primary productivity (GPP), ecosystem respiration (Reco ), net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE; Reco - GPP), and terrestrial methane (CH4 ) emissions for the Arctic-boreal zone using a satellite data-driven process-model for northern ecosystems (TCFM-Arctic), calibrated and evaluated using measurements from >60 tower eddy covariance (EC) sites. We used TCFM-Arctic to obtain daily 1-km2 flux estimates and annual carbon budgets for the pan-Arctic-boreal region. Across the domain, the model indicated an overall average NEE sink of -850 Tg CO2 -C year-1 . Eurasian boreal zones, especially those in Siberia, contributed to a majority of the net sink. In contrast, the tundra biome was relatively carbon neutral (ranging from small sink to source). Regional CH4 emissions from tundra and boreal wetlands (not accounting for aquatic CH4 ) were estimated at 35 Tg CH4 -C year-1 . Accounting for additional emissions from open water aquatic bodies and from fire, using available estimates from the literature, reduced the total regional NEE sink by 21% and shifted many far northern tundra landscapes, and some boreal forests, to a net carbon source. This assessment, based on in situ observations and models, improves our understanding of the high-latitude carbon status and also indicates a continued need for integrated site-to-regional assessments to monitor the vulnerability of these ecosystems to climate change.

DOI bib
Carbon uptake in Eurasian boreal forests dominates the high‐latitude net ecosystem carbon budget
Jennifer D. Watts, Mary Farina, John S. Kimball, Luke D. Schiferl, Zhihua Liu, Kyle A. Arndt, Donatella Zona, Ashley P. Ballantyne, E. S. Euskirchen, Frans‐Jan W. Parmentier, Manuel Helbig, Oliver Sonnentag, Torbern Tagesson, Janne Rinne, Hiroki Ikawa, Masahito Ueyama, Hideki Kobayashi, Torsten Sachs, Daniel F. Nadeau, John Kochendorfer, M. Jackowicz-Korczyński, Anna Virkkala, Mika Aurela, R. Commane, Brendan Byrne, Leah Birch, Matthew S. Johnson, Nima Madani, Brendan M. Rogers, Jinyang Du, Arthur Endsley, K. E. Savage, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Zhang, L. M. Bruhwiler, Charles E. Miller, S. J. Goetz, Walter C. Oechel, Jennifer D. Watts, Mary Farina, John S. Kimball, Luke D. Schiferl, Zhihua Liu, Kyle A. Arndt, Donatella Zona, Ashley P. Ballantyne, E. S. Euskirchen, Frans‐Jan W. Parmentier, Manuel Helbig, Oliver Sonnentag, Torbern Tagesson, Janne Rinne, Hiroki Ikawa, Masahito Ueyama, Hideki Kobayashi, Torsten Sachs, Daniel F. Nadeau, John Kochendorfer, M. Jackowicz-Korczyński, Anna Virkkala, Mika Aurela, R. Commane, Brendan Byrne, Leah Birch, Matthew S. Johnson, Nima Madani, Brendan M. Rogers, Jinyang Du, Arthur Endsley, K. E. Savage, Benjamin Poulter, Zhen Zhang, L. M. Bruhwiler, Charles E. Miller, S. J. Goetz, Walter C. Oechel
Global Change Biology, Volume 29, Issue 7

Arctic-boreal landscapes are experiencing profound warming, along with changes in ecosystem moisture status and disturbance from fire. This region is of global importance in terms of carbon feedbacks to climate, yet the sign (sink or source) and magnitude of the Arctic-boreal carbon budget within recent years remains highly uncertain. Here, we provide new estimates of recent (2003-2015) vegetation gross primary productivity (GPP), ecosystem respiration (Reco ), net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE; Reco - GPP), and terrestrial methane (CH4 ) emissions for the Arctic-boreal zone using a satellite data-driven process-model for northern ecosystems (TCFM-Arctic), calibrated and evaluated using measurements from >60 tower eddy covariance (EC) sites. We used TCFM-Arctic to obtain daily 1-km2 flux estimates and annual carbon budgets for the pan-Arctic-boreal region. Across the domain, the model indicated an overall average NEE sink of -850 Tg CO2 -C year-1 . Eurasian boreal zones, especially those in Siberia, contributed to a majority of the net sink. In contrast, the tundra biome was relatively carbon neutral (ranging from small sink to source). Regional CH4 emissions from tundra and boreal wetlands (not accounting for aquatic CH4 ) were estimated at 35 Tg CH4 -C year-1 . Accounting for additional emissions from open water aquatic bodies and from fire, using available estimates from the literature, reduced the total regional NEE sink by 21% and shifted many far northern tundra landscapes, and some boreal forests, to a net carbon source. This assessment, based on in situ observations and models, improves our understanding of the high-latitude carbon status and also indicates a continued need for integrated site-to-regional assessments to monitor the vulnerability of these ecosystems to climate change.

DOI bib
Upscaling Wetland Methane Emissions From the FLUXNET‐CH4 Eddy Covariance Network (UpCH4 v1.0): Model Development, Network Assessment, and Budget Comparison
Gavin McNicol, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Zutao Ouyang, Sara Knox, Zhen Zhang, Tuula Aalto, Sheel Bansal, Kuang‐Yu Chang, Min Chen, Kyle Delwiche, Sarah Féron, Mathias Goeckede, Jinxun Liu, Avni Malhotra, Joe R. Melton, W. J. Riley, Rodrigo Vargas, Kunxiaojia Yuan, Qing Ying, Qing Zhu, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, David P. Billesbach, David I. Campbell, Jiquan Chen, Housen Chu, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Jordan P. Goodrich, Timothy J. Griffis, Manuel Helbig, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Gerald Jurasinski, John S. King, Franziska Koebsch, Randall K. Kolka, Ken W. Krauss, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Mats E Nilson, Asko Noormets, Walter C. Oechel, Matthias Peichl, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Christopher Schulze, Oliver Sonnentag, Ryan C. Sullivan, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Masahito Ueyama, Timo Vesala, Eric J. Ward, Christian Wille, Guan Xhuan Wong, Donatella Zona, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson
AGU Advances, Volume 4, Issue 5

Abstract Wetlands are responsible for 20%–31% of global methane (CH 4 ) emissions and account for a large source of uncertainty in the global CH 4 budget. Data‐driven upscaling of CH 4 fluxes from eddy covariance measurements can provide new and independent bottom‐up estimates of wetland CH 4 emissions. Here, we develop a six‐predictor random forest upscaling model (UpCH4), trained on 119 site‐years of eddy covariance CH 4 flux data from 43 freshwater wetland sites in the FLUXNET‐CH4 Community Product. Network patterns in site‐level annual means and mean seasonal cycles of CH 4 fluxes were reproduced accurately in tundra, boreal, and temperate regions (Nash‐Sutcliffe Efficiency ∼0.52–0.63 and 0.53). UpCH4 estimated annual global wetland CH 4 emissions of 146 ± 43 TgCH 4 y −1 for 2001–2018 which agrees closely with current bottom‐up land surface models (102–181 TgCH 4 y −1 ) and overlaps with top‐down atmospheric inversion models (155–200 TgCH 4 y −1 ). However, UpCH4 diverged from both types of models in the spatial pattern and seasonal dynamics of tropical wetland emissions. We conclude that upscaling of eddy covariance CH 4 fluxes has the potential to produce realistic extra‐tropical wetland CH 4 emissions estimates which will improve with more flux data. To reduce uncertainty in upscaled estimates, researchers could prioritize new wetland flux sites along humid‐to‐arid tropical climate gradients, from major rainforest basins (Congo, Amazon, and SE Asia), into monsoon (Bangladesh and India) and savannah regions (African Sahel) and be paired with improved knowledge of wetland extent seasonal dynamics in these regions. The monthly wetland methane products gridded at 0.25° from UpCH4 are available via ORNL DAAC ( https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2253 ).

2022

DOI bib
Characterizing performance of freshwater wetland methane models across time scales at FLUXNET-CH4 sites using wavelet analyses
Zhen Zhang, Sheel Bansal, Kuang‐Yu Chang, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Kyle Delwiche, Mathias Goeckede, A. F. Gustafson, Sara Knox, Antti Leppänen, Licheng Liu, Jinxun Liu, Avni Malhotra, Tiina Markkanen, Gavin McNicol, Joe R. Melton, Paul Miller, Changhui Peng, Maarit Raivonen, W. J. Riley, Oliver Sonnentag, Tuula Aalto, Rodrigo Vargas, Wenxin Zhang, Qing Zhu, Qiuan Zhu, Qianlai Zhuang, L. Windham‐Myers, Robert B. Jackson, Benjamin Poulter

Process-based land surface models are important tools for estimating global wetland methane (CH4) emissions and projecting their behavior across space and time. So far there are no performance assessments of model responses to drivers at multiple time scales. In this study, we apply wavelet analysis to identify the dominant time scales contributing to model uncertainty in the frequency domain. We evaluate seven wetland models at 23 eddy covariance tower sites. Our study first characterizes site-level patterns of freshwater wetland CH4 fluxes (FCH4) at different time scales. A Monte Carlo approach has been developed to incorporate flux observation error to avoid misidentification of the time scales that dominate model error. Our results suggest that 1) significant model-observation disagreements are mainly at short- to intermediate time scales (< 15 days); 2) most of the models can capture the CH4 variability at long time scales (> 32 days) for the boreal and Arctic tundra wetland sites but have limited performance for temperate and tropical/subtropical sites; 3) model error approximates pink noise patterns, indicating that biases at short time scales (< 5 days) could contribute to persistent systematic biases on longer time scales; and 4) differences in error pattern are related to model structure (e.g. proxy of CH4 production). Our evaluation suggests the need to accurately replicate FCH4 variability in future wetland CH4 model developments.

2021

DOI bib
FLUXNET-CH<sub>4</sub>: a global, multi-ecosystem dataset and analysis of methane seasonality from freshwater wetlands
Kyle Delwiche, Sara Knox, Avni Malhotra, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Gavin McNicol, Sarah Féron, Zutao Ouyang, Dario Papale, Carlo Trotta, Eleonora Canfora, You-Wei Cheah, Danielle Christianson, Ma. Carmelita Alberto, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, David P. Billesbach, Gil Bohrer, Rosvel Bracho, Nina Buchmann, David I. Campbell, Gerardo Celis, Jiquan Chen, Weinan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Sigrid Dengel, Ankur R. Desai, Matteo Detto, A. J. Dolman, Elke Eichelmann, E. S. Euskirchen, D. Famulari, Kathrin Fuchs, Mathias Goeckede, Sébastien Gogo, Mangaliso J. Gondwe, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Scott L. Graham, Martin Heimann, Manuel Helbig, Carole Helfter, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, David Y. Hollinger, Lukas Hörtnagl, Hiroki Iwata, Adrien Jacotot, Gerald Jurasinski, Minseok Kang, Kuno Kasak, John S. King, Janina Klatt, Franziska Koebsch, Ken W. Krauss, Derrick Y.F. Lai, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Luca Belelli Marchesini, Giovanni Manca, Jaclyn Hatala Matthes, Trofim C. Maximov, Lutz Merbold, Bhaskar Mitra, Timothy H. Morin, Eiko Nemitz, Mats B. Nilsson, Shuli Niu, Walter C. Oechel, Patricia Y. Oikawa, Keisuke Ono, Matthias Peichl, Olli Peltola, Michele L. Reba, Andrew D. Richardson, W. J. Riley, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Camilo Rey‐Sánchez, Edward A. G. Schuur, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Oliver Sonnentag, Jed P. Sparks, Ellen Stuart‐Haëntjens, Cove Sturtevant, Ryan C. Sullivan, Daphne Szutu, Jonathan E. Thom, Margaret Torn, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Jessica Turner, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Rodrigo Vargas, Andrej Varlagin, Alma Vázquez‐Lule, Joseph Verfaillie, Timo Vesala, George L. Vourlitis, Eric J. Ward, Christian Wille, Georg Wohlfahrt, Guan Xhuan Wong, Zhen Zhang, Donatella Zona, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Kyle Delwiche, Sara Knox, Avni Malhotra, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Gavin McNicol, Sarah Féron, Zutao Ouyang, Dario Papale, Carlo Trotta, Eleonora Canfora, You-Wei Cheah, Danielle Christianson, Ma. Carmelita Alberto, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, David P. Billesbach, Gil Bohrer, Rosvel Bracho, Nina Buchmann, David I. Campbell, Gerardo Celis, Jiquan Chen, Weinan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Sigrid Dengel, Ankur R. Desai, Matteo Detto, A. J. Dolman, Elke Eichelmann, E. S. Euskirchen, D. Famulari, Kathrin Fuchs, Mathias Goeckede, Sébastien Gogo, Mangaliso J. Gondwe, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Scott L. Graham, Martin Heimann, Manuel Helbig, Carole Helfter, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, David Y. Hollinger, Lukas Hörtnagl, Hiroki Iwata, Adrien Jacotot, Gerald Jurasinski, Minseok Kang, Kuno Kasak, John S. King, Janina Klatt, Franziska Koebsch, Ken W. Krauss, Derrick Y.F. Lai, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Luca Belelli Marchesini, Giovanni Manca, Jaclyn Hatala Matthes, Trofim C. Maximov, Lutz Merbold, Bhaskar Mitra, Timothy H. Morin, Eiko Nemitz, Mats B. Nilsson, Shuli Niu, Walter C. Oechel, Patricia Y. Oikawa, Keisuke Ono, Matthias Peichl, Olli Peltola, Michele L. Reba, Andrew D. Richardson, W. J. Riley, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Camilo Rey‐Sánchez, Edward A. G. Schuur, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Oliver Sonnentag, Jed P. Sparks, Ellen Stuart‐Haëntjens, Cove Sturtevant, Ryan C. Sullivan, Daphne Szutu, Jonathan E. Thom, Margaret Torn, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Jessica Turner, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Rodrigo Vargas, Andrej Varlagin, Alma Vázquez‐Lule, Joseph Verfaillie, Timo Vesala, George L. Vourlitis, Eric J. Ward, Christian Wille, Georg Wohlfahrt, Guan Xhuan Wong, Zhen Zhang, Donatella Zona, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson
Earth System Science Data, Volume 13, Issue 7

Abstract. Methane (CH4) emissions from natural landscapes constitute roughly half of global CH4 contributions to the atmosphere, yet large uncertainties remain in the absolute magnitude and the seasonality of emission quantities and drivers. Eddy covariance (EC) measurements of CH4 flux are ideal for constraining ecosystem-scale CH4 emissions due to quasi-continuous and high-temporal-resolution CH4 flux measurements, coincident carbon dioxide, water, and energy flux measurements, lack of ecosystem disturbance, and increased availability of datasets over the last decade. Here, we (1) describe the newly published dataset, FLUXNET-CH4 Version 1.0, the first open-source global dataset of CH4 EC measurements (available at https://fluxnet.org/data/fluxnet-ch4-community-product/, last access: 7 April 2021). FLUXNET-CH4 includes half-hourly and daily gap-filled and non-gap-filled aggregated CH4 fluxes and meteorological data from 79 sites globally: 42 freshwater wetlands, 6 brackish and saline wetlands, 7 formerly drained ecosystems, 7 rice paddy sites, 2 lakes, and 15 uplands. Then, we (2) evaluate FLUXNET-CH4 representativeness for freshwater wetland coverage globally because the majority of sites in FLUXNET-CH4 Version 1.0 are freshwater wetlands which are a substantial source of total atmospheric CH4 emissions; and (3) we provide the first global estimates of the seasonal variability and seasonality predictors of freshwater wetland CH4 fluxes. Our representativeness analysis suggests that the freshwater wetland sites in the dataset cover global wetland bioclimatic attributes (encompassing energy, moisture, and vegetation-related parameters) in arctic, boreal, and temperate regions but only sparsely cover humid tropical regions. Seasonality metrics of wetland CH4 emissions vary considerably across latitudinal bands. In freshwater wetlands (except those between 20∘ S to 20∘ N) the spring onset of elevated CH4 emissions starts 3 d earlier, and the CH4 emission season lasts 4 d longer, for each degree Celsius increase in mean annual air temperature. On average, the spring onset of increasing CH4 emissions lags behind soil warming by 1 month, with very few sites experiencing increased CH4 emissions prior to the onset of soil warming. In contrast, roughly half of these sites experience the spring onset of rising CH4 emissions prior to the spring increase in gross primary productivity (GPP). The timing of peak summer CH4 emissions does not correlate with the timing for either peak summer temperature or peak GPP. Our results provide seasonality parameters for CH4 modeling and highlight seasonality metrics that cannot be predicted by temperature or GPP (i.e., seasonality of CH4 peak). FLUXNET-CH4 is a powerful new resource for diagnosing and understanding the role of terrestrial ecosystems and climate drivers in the global CH4 cycle, and future additions of sites in tropical ecosystems and site years of data collection will provide added value to this database. All seasonality parameters are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4672601 (Delwiche et al., 2021). Additionally, raw FLUXNET-CH4 data used to extract seasonality parameters can be downloaded from https://fluxnet.org/data/fluxnet-ch4-community-product/ (last access: 7 April 2021), and a complete list of the 79 individual site data DOIs is provided in Table 2 of this paper.

DOI bib
FLUXNET-CH<sub>4</sub>: a global, multi-ecosystem dataset and analysis of methane seasonality from freshwater wetlands
Kyle Delwiche, Sara Knox, Avni Malhotra, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Gavin McNicol, Sarah Féron, Zutao Ouyang, Dario Papale, Carlo Trotta, Eleonora Canfora, You-Wei Cheah, Danielle Christianson, Ma. Carmelita Alberto, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, David P. Billesbach, Gil Bohrer, Rosvel Bracho, Nina Buchmann, David I. Campbell, Gerardo Celis, Jiquan Chen, Weinan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Sigrid Dengel, Ankur R. Desai, Matteo Detto, A. J. Dolman, Elke Eichelmann, E. S. Euskirchen, D. Famulari, Kathrin Fuchs, Mathias Goeckede, Sébastien Gogo, Mangaliso J. Gondwe, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Scott L. Graham, Martin Heimann, Manuel Helbig, Carole Helfter, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, David Y. Hollinger, Lukas Hörtnagl, Hiroki Iwata, Adrien Jacotot, Gerald Jurasinski, Minseok Kang, Kuno Kasak, John S. King, Janina Klatt, Franziska Koebsch, Ken W. Krauss, Derrick Y.F. Lai, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Luca Belelli Marchesini, Giovanni Manca, Jaclyn Hatala Matthes, Trofim C. Maximov, Lutz Merbold, Bhaskar Mitra, Timothy H. Morin, Eiko Nemitz, Mats B. Nilsson, Shuli Niu, Walter C. Oechel, Patricia Y. Oikawa, Keisuke Ono, Matthias Peichl, Olli Peltola, Michele L. Reba, Andrew D. Richardson, W. J. Riley, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Camilo Rey‐Sánchez, Edward A. G. Schuur, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Oliver Sonnentag, Jed P. Sparks, Ellen Stuart‐Haëntjens, Cove Sturtevant, Ryan C. Sullivan, Daphne Szutu, Jonathan E. Thom, Margaret Torn, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Jessica Turner, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Rodrigo Vargas, Andrej Varlagin, Alma Vázquez‐Lule, Joseph Verfaillie, Timo Vesala, George L. Vourlitis, Eric J. Ward, Christian Wille, Georg Wohlfahrt, Guan Xhuan Wong, Zhen Zhang, Donatella Zona, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Kyle Delwiche, Sara Knox, Avni Malhotra, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Gavin McNicol, Sarah Féron, Zutao Ouyang, Dario Papale, Carlo Trotta, Eleonora Canfora, You-Wei Cheah, Danielle Christianson, Ma. Carmelita Alberto, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, David P. Billesbach, Gil Bohrer, Rosvel Bracho, Nina Buchmann, David I. Campbell, Gerardo Celis, Jiquan Chen, Weinan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Sigrid Dengel, Ankur R. Desai, Matteo Detto, A. J. Dolman, Elke Eichelmann, E. S. Euskirchen, D. Famulari, Kathrin Fuchs, Mathias Goeckede, Sébastien Gogo, Mangaliso J. Gondwe, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Scott L. Graham, Martin Heimann, Manuel Helbig, Carole Helfter, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, David Y. Hollinger, Lukas Hörtnagl, Hiroki Iwata, Adrien Jacotot, Gerald Jurasinski, Minseok Kang, Kuno Kasak, John S. King, Janina Klatt, Franziska Koebsch, Ken W. Krauss, Derrick Y.F. Lai, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Luca Belelli Marchesini, Giovanni Manca, Jaclyn Hatala Matthes, Trofim C. Maximov, Lutz Merbold, Bhaskar Mitra, Timothy H. Morin, Eiko Nemitz, Mats B. Nilsson, Shuli Niu, Walter C. Oechel, Patricia Y. Oikawa, Keisuke Ono, Matthias Peichl, Olli Peltola, Michele L. Reba, Andrew D. Richardson, W. J. Riley, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Camilo Rey‐Sánchez, Edward A. G. Schuur, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Oliver Sonnentag, Jed P. Sparks, Ellen Stuart‐Haëntjens, Cove Sturtevant, Ryan C. Sullivan, Daphne Szutu, Jonathan E. Thom, Margaret Torn, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Jessica Turner, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Rodrigo Vargas, Andrej Varlagin, Alma Vázquez‐Lule, Joseph Verfaillie, Timo Vesala, George L. Vourlitis, Eric J. Ward, Christian Wille, Georg Wohlfahrt, Guan Xhuan Wong, Zhen Zhang, Donatella Zona, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson
Earth System Science Data, Volume 13, Issue 7

Abstract. Methane (CH4) emissions from natural landscapes constitute roughly half of global CH4 contributions to the atmosphere, yet large uncertainties remain in the absolute magnitude and the seasonality of emission quantities and drivers. Eddy covariance (EC) measurements of CH4 flux are ideal for constraining ecosystem-scale CH4 emissions due to quasi-continuous and high-temporal-resolution CH4 flux measurements, coincident carbon dioxide, water, and energy flux measurements, lack of ecosystem disturbance, and increased availability of datasets over the last decade. Here, we (1) describe the newly published dataset, FLUXNET-CH4 Version 1.0, the first open-source global dataset of CH4 EC measurements (available at https://fluxnet.org/data/fluxnet-ch4-community-product/, last access: 7 April 2021). FLUXNET-CH4 includes half-hourly and daily gap-filled and non-gap-filled aggregated CH4 fluxes and meteorological data from 79 sites globally: 42 freshwater wetlands, 6 brackish and saline wetlands, 7 formerly drained ecosystems, 7 rice paddy sites, 2 lakes, and 15 uplands. Then, we (2) evaluate FLUXNET-CH4 representativeness for freshwater wetland coverage globally because the majority of sites in FLUXNET-CH4 Version 1.0 are freshwater wetlands which are a substantial source of total atmospheric CH4 emissions; and (3) we provide the first global estimates of the seasonal variability and seasonality predictors of freshwater wetland CH4 fluxes. Our representativeness analysis suggests that the freshwater wetland sites in the dataset cover global wetland bioclimatic attributes (encompassing energy, moisture, and vegetation-related parameters) in arctic, boreal, and temperate regions but only sparsely cover humid tropical regions. Seasonality metrics of wetland CH4 emissions vary considerably across latitudinal bands. In freshwater wetlands (except those between 20∘ S to 20∘ N) the spring onset of elevated CH4 emissions starts 3 d earlier, and the CH4 emission season lasts 4 d longer, for each degree Celsius increase in mean annual air temperature. On average, the spring onset of increasing CH4 emissions lags behind soil warming by 1 month, with very few sites experiencing increased CH4 emissions prior to the onset of soil warming. In contrast, roughly half of these sites experience the spring onset of rising CH4 emissions prior to the spring increase in gross primary productivity (GPP). The timing of peak summer CH4 emissions does not correlate with the timing for either peak summer temperature or peak GPP. Our results provide seasonality parameters for CH4 modeling and highlight seasonality metrics that cannot be predicted by temperature or GPP (i.e., seasonality of CH4 peak). FLUXNET-CH4 is a powerful new resource for diagnosing and understanding the role of terrestrial ecosystems and climate drivers in the global CH4 cycle, and future additions of sites in tropical ecosystems and site years of data collection will provide added value to this database. All seasonality parameters are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4672601 (Delwiche et al., 2021). Additionally, raw FLUXNET-CH4 data used to extract seasonality parameters can be downloaded from https://fluxnet.org/data/fluxnet-ch4-community-product/ (last access: 7 April 2021), and a complete list of the 79 individual site data DOIs is provided in Table 2 of this paper.

DOI bib
Substantial hysteresis in emergent temperature sensitivity of global wetland CH4 emissions
Kuang‐Yu Chang, W. J. Riley, Sara Knox, Robert B. Jackson, Gavin McNicol, Benjamin Poulter, Mika Aurela, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Alessandro Cescatti, Housen Chu, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Thomas Friborg, Mathias Goeckede, Manuel Helbig, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Minseok Kang, Trevor F. Keenan, Ken W. Krauss, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Bhaskar Mitra, Akira Miyata, Mats B. Nilsson, Asko Noormets, Walter C. Oechel, Dario Papale, Matthias Peichl, Michele L. Reba, Janne Rinne, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Hans Peter Schmid, Narasinha Shurpali, Oliver Sonnentag, Angela C. I. Tang, Margaret Torn, Carlo Trotta, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Masahito Ueyama, Rodrigo Vargas, Timo Vesala, L. Windham‐Myers, Zhen Zhang, Donatella Zona, Kuang‐Yu Chang, W. J. Riley, Sara Knox, Robert B. Jackson, Gavin McNicol, Benjamin Poulter, Mika Aurela, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Alessandro Cescatti, Housen Chu, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Thomas Friborg, Mathias Goeckede, Manuel Helbig, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Minseok Kang, Trevor F. Keenan, Ken W. Krauss, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Bhaskar Mitra, Akira Miyata, Mats B. Nilsson, Asko Noormets, Walter C. Oechel, Dario Papale, Matthias Peichl, Michele L. Reba, Janne Rinne, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Hans Peter Schmid, Narasinha Shurpali, Oliver Sonnentag, Angela C. I. Tang, Margaret Torn, Carlo Trotta, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Masahito Ueyama, Rodrigo Vargas, Timo Vesala, L. Windham‐Myers, Zhen Zhang, Donatella Zona
Nature Communications, Volume 12, Issue 1

Abstract Wetland methane (CH 4 ) emissions ( $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> ) are important in global carbon budgets and climate change assessments. Currently, $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> projections rely on prescribed static temperature sensitivity that varies among biogeochemical models. Meta-analyses have proposed a consistent $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> temperature dependence across spatial scales for use in models; however, site-level studies demonstrate that $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> are often controlled by factors beyond temperature. Here, we evaluate the relationship between $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> and temperature using observations from the FLUXNET-CH 4 database. Measurements collected across the globe show substantial seasonal hysteresis between $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> and temperature, suggesting larger $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> sensitivity to temperature later in the frost-free season (about 77% of site-years). Results derived from a machine-learning model and several regression models highlight the importance of representing the large spatial and temporal variability within site-years and ecosystem types. Mechanistic advancements in biogeochemical model parameterization and detailed measurements in factors modulating CH 4 production are thus needed to improve global CH 4 budget assessments.

DOI bib
Substantial hysteresis in emergent temperature sensitivity of global wetland CH4 emissions
Kuang‐Yu Chang, W. J. Riley, Sara Knox, Robert B. Jackson, Gavin McNicol, Benjamin Poulter, Mika Aurela, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Alessandro Cescatti, Housen Chu, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Thomas Friborg, Mathias Goeckede, Manuel Helbig, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Minseok Kang, Trevor F. Keenan, Ken W. Krauss, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Bhaskar Mitra, Akira Miyata, Mats B. Nilsson, Asko Noormets, Walter C. Oechel, Dario Papale, Matthias Peichl, Michele L. Reba, Janne Rinne, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Hans Peter Schmid, Narasinha Shurpali, Oliver Sonnentag, Angela C. I. Tang, Margaret Torn, Carlo Trotta, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Masahito Ueyama, Rodrigo Vargas, Timo Vesala, L. Windham‐Myers, Zhen Zhang, Donatella Zona, Kuang‐Yu Chang, W. J. Riley, Sara Knox, Robert B. Jackson, Gavin McNicol, Benjamin Poulter, Mika Aurela, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Alessandro Cescatti, Housen Chu, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Thomas Friborg, Mathias Goeckede, Manuel Helbig, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Minseok Kang, Trevor F. Keenan, Ken W. Krauss, Annalea Lohila, Ivan Mammarella, Bhaskar Mitra, Akira Miyata, Mats B. Nilsson, Asko Noormets, Walter C. Oechel, Dario Papale, Matthias Peichl, Michele L. Reba, Janne Rinne, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Hans Peter Schmid, Narasinha Shurpali, Oliver Sonnentag, Angela C. I. Tang, Margaret Torn, Carlo Trotta, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Masahito Ueyama, Rodrigo Vargas, Timo Vesala, L. Windham‐Myers, Zhen Zhang, Donatella Zona
Nature Communications, Volume 12, Issue 1

Abstract Wetland methane (CH 4 ) emissions ( $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> ) are important in global carbon budgets and climate change assessments. Currently, $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> projections rely on prescribed static temperature sensitivity that varies among biogeochemical models. Meta-analyses have proposed a consistent $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> temperature dependence across spatial scales for use in models; however, site-level studies demonstrate that $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> are often controlled by factors beyond temperature. Here, we evaluate the relationship between $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> and temperature using observations from the FLUXNET-CH 4 database. Measurements collected across the globe show substantial seasonal hysteresis between $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> and temperature, suggesting larger $${F}_{{{CH}}_{4}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>C</mml:mi> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> sensitivity to temperature later in the frost-free season (about 77% of site-years). Results derived from a machine-learning model and several regression models highlight the importance of representing the large spatial and temporal variability within site-years and ecosystem types. Mechanistic advancements in biogeochemical model parameterization and detailed measurements in factors modulating CH 4 production are thus needed to improve global CH 4 budget assessments.

DOI bib
Gap-filling eddy covariance methane fluxes: Comparison of machine learning model predictions and uncertainties at FLUXNET-CH4 wetlands
Jeremy Irvin, Sharon Zhou, Gavin McNicol, Fred Lu, Vincent Liu, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Zutao Ouyang, Sara Knox, Antje Lucas-Moffat, Carlo Trotta, Dario Papale, Domenico Vitale, Ivan Mammarella, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Anand Avati, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Jiquan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Sarah Féron, Mathias Goeckede, Martin Heimann, Manuel Helbig, Carole Helfter, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Gerald Jurasinski, Aram Kalhori, Andrew Kondrich, Derrick Y.F. Lai, Annalea Lohila, Avni Malhotra, Lutz Merbold, Bhaskar Mitra, Andrew Y. Ng, Mats B. Nilsson, Asko Noormets, Matthias Peichl, Camilo Rey‐Sánchez, Andrew D. Richardson, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Karina VR Schäfer, Oliver Sonnentag, Ellen Stuart‐Haëntjens, Cove Sturtevant, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Rodrigo Vargas, George L. Vourlitis, Eric J. Ward, Guan Xhuan Wong, Donatella Zona, Ma. Carmelita Alberto, David P. Billesbach, Gerardo Celis, A. J. Dolman, Thomas Friborg, Kathrin Fuchs, Sébastien Gogo, Mangaliso J. Gondwe, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Lukas Hörtnagl, Adrien Jacotot, Franziska Koebsch, Kuno Kasak, Regine Maier, Timothy H. Morin, Eiko Nemitz, Walter C. Oechel, Patricia Y. Oikawa, Keisuke Ono, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Edward A. G. Schuur, Robert Shortt, Ryan C. Sullivan, Daphne Szutu, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Andrej Varlagin, Joeseph G Verfaillie, Christian Wille, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Jeremy Irvin, Sharon Zhou, Gavin McNicol, Fred Lu, Vincent Liu, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Zutao Ouyang, Sara Knox, Antje Lucas-Moffat, Carlo Trotta, Dario Papale, Domenico Vitale, Ivan Mammarella, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Anand Avati, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Jiquan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Sarah Féron, Mathias Goeckede, Martin Heimann, Manuel Helbig, Carole Helfter, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Gerald Jurasinski, Aram Kalhori, Andrew Kondrich, Derrick Y.F. Lai, Annalea Lohila, Avni Malhotra, Lutz Merbold, Bhaskar Mitra, Andrew Y. Ng, Mats B. Nilsson, Asko Noormets, Matthias Peichl, Camilo Rey‐Sánchez, Andrew D. Richardson, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Karina VR Schäfer, Oliver Sonnentag, Ellen Stuart‐Haëntjens, Cove Sturtevant, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Rodrigo Vargas, George L. Vourlitis, Eric J. Ward, Guan Xhuan Wong, Donatella Zona, Ma. Carmelita Alberto, David P. Billesbach, Gerardo Celis, A. J. Dolman, Thomas Friborg, Kathrin Fuchs, Sébastien Gogo, Mangaliso J. Gondwe, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Lukas Hörtnagl, Adrien Jacotot, Franziska Koebsch, Kuno Kasak, Regine Maier, Timothy H. Morin, Eiko Nemitz, Walter C. Oechel, Patricia Y. Oikawa, Keisuke Ono, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Edward A. G. Schuur, Robert Shortt, Ryan C. Sullivan, Daphne Szutu, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Andrej Varlagin, Joeseph G Verfaillie, Christian Wille, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, Volume 308-309

• We evaluate methane flux gap-filling methods across 17 boreal-to-tropical wetlands • New methods for generating realistic artificial gaps and uncertainties are proposed • Decision tree algorithms perform slightly better than neural networks on average • Soil temperature and generic seasonality are the most important predictors • Open-source code is released for gap-filling steps and uncertainty evaluation Time series of wetland methane fluxes measured by eddy covariance require gap-filling to estimate daily, seasonal, and annual emissions. Gap-filling methane fluxes is challenging because of high variability and complex responses to multiple drivers. To date, there is no widely established gap-filling standard for wetland methane fluxes, with regards both to the best model algorithms and predictors. This study synthesizes results of different gap-filling methods systematically applied at 17 wetland sites spanning boreal to tropical regions and including all major wetland classes and two rice paddies. Procedures are proposed for: 1) creating realistic artificial gap scenarios, 2) training and evaluating gap-filling models without overstating performance, and 3) predicting half-hourly methane fluxes and annual emissions with realistic uncertainty estimates. Performance is compared between a conventional method (marginal distribution sampling) and four machine learning algorithms. The conventional method achieved similar median performance as the machine learning models but was worse than the best machine learning models and relatively insensitive to predictor choices. Of the machine learning models, decision tree algorithms performed the best in cross-validation experiments, even with a baseline predictor set, and artificial neural networks showed comparable performance when using all predictors. Soil temperature was frequently the most important predictor whilst water table depth was important at sites with substantial water table fluctuations, highlighting the value of data on wetland soil conditions. Raw gap-filling uncertainties from the machine learning models were underestimated and we propose a method to calibrate uncertainties to observations. The python code for model development, evaluation, and uncertainty estimation is publicly available. This study outlines a modular and robust machine learning workflow and makes recommendations for, and evaluates an improved baseline of, methane gap-filling models that can be implemented in multi-site syntheses or standardized products from regional and global flux networks (e.g., FLUXNET).

DOI bib
Gap-filling eddy covariance methane fluxes: Comparison of machine learning model predictions and uncertainties at FLUXNET-CH4 wetlands
Jeremy Irvin, Sharon Zhou, Gavin McNicol, Fred Lu, Vincent Liu, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Zutao Ouyang, Sara Knox, Antje Lucas-Moffat, Carlo Trotta, Dario Papale, Domenico Vitale, Ivan Mammarella, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Anand Avati, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Jiquan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Sarah Féron, Mathias Goeckede, Martin Heimann, Manuel Helbig, Carole Helfter, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Gerald Jurasinski, Aram Kalhori, Andrew Kondrich, Derrick Y.F. Lai, Annalea Lohila, Avni Malhotra, Lutz Merbold, Bhaskar Mitra, Andrew Y. Ng, Mats B. Nilsson, Asko Noormets, Matthias Peichl, Camilo Rey‐Sánchez, Andrew D. Richardson, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Karina VR Schäfer, Oliver Sonnentag, Ellen Stuart‐Haëntjens, Cove Sturtevant, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Rodrigo Vargas, George L. Vourlitis, Eric J. Ward, Guan Xhuan Wong, Donatella Zona, Ma. Carmelita Alberto, David P. Billesbach, Gerardo Celis, A. J. Dolman, Thomas Friborg, Kathrin Fuchs, Sébastien Gogo, Mangaliso J. Gondwe, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Lukas Hörtnagl, Adrien Jacotot, Franziska Koebsch, Kuno Kasak, Regine Maier, Timothy H. Morin, Eiko Nemitz, Walter C. Oechel, Patricia Y. Oikawa, Keisuke Ono, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Edward A. G. Schuur, Robert Shortt, Ryan C. Sullivan, Daphne Szutu, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Andrej Varlagin, Joeseph G Verfaillie, Christian Wille, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Jeremy Irvin, Sharon Zhou, Gavin McNicol, Fred Lu, Vincent Liu, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Zutao Ouyang, Sara Knox, Antje Lucas-Moffat, Carlo Trotta, Dario Papale, Domenico Vitale, Ivan Mammarella, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Anand Avati, Dennis Baldocchi, Sheel Bansal, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Jiquan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Sarah Féron, Mathias Goeckede, Martin Heimann, Manuel Helbig, Carole Helfter, Kyle S. Hemes, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Gerald Jurasinski, Aram Kalhori, Andrew Kondrich, Derrick Y.F. Lai, Annalea Lohila, Avni Malhotra, Lutz Merbold, Bhaskar Mitra, Andrew Y. Ng, Mats B. Nilsson, Asko Noormets, Matthias Peichl, Camilo Rey‐Sánchez, Andrew D. Richardson, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Karina VR Schäfer, Oliver Sonnentag, Ellen Stuart‐Haëntjens, Cove Sturtevant, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Rodrigo Vargas, George L. Vourlitis, Eric J. Ward, Guan Xhuan Wong, Donatella Zona, Ma. Carmelita Alberto, David P. Billesbach, Gerardo Celis, A. J. Dolman, Thomas Friborg, Kathrin Fuchs, Sébastien Gogo, Mangaliso J. Gondwe, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Lukas Hörtnagl, Adrien Jacotot, Franziska Koebsch, Kuno Kasak, Regine Maier, Timothy H. Morin, Eiko Nemitz, Walter C. Oechel, Patricia Y. Oikawa, Keisuke Ono, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Edward A. G. Schuur, Robert Shortt, Ryan C. Sullivan, Daphne Szutu, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, Andrej Varlagin, Joeseph G Verfaillie, Christian Wille, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, Volume 308-309

• We evaluate methane flux gap-filling methods across 17 boreal-to-tropical wetlands • New methods for generating realistic artificial gaps and uncertainties are proposed • Decision tree algorithms perform slightly better than neural networks on average • Soil temperature and generic seasonality are the most important predictors • Open-source code is released for gap-filling steps and uncertainty evaluation Time series of wetland methane fluxes measured by eddy covariance require gap-filling to estimate daily, seasonal, and annual emissions. Gap-filling methane fluxes is challenging because of high variability and complex responses to multiple drivers. To date, there is no widely established gap-filling standard for wetland methane fluxes, with regards both to the best model algorithms and predictors. This study synthesizes results of different gap-filling methods systematically applied at 17 wetland sites spanning boreal to tropical regions and including all major wetland classes and two rice paddies. Procedures are proposed for: 1) creating realistic artificial gap scenarios, 2) training and evaluating gap-filling models without overstating performance, and 3) predicting half-hourly methane fluxes and annual emissions with realistic uncertainty estimates. Performance is compared between a conventional method (marginal distribution sampling) and four machine learning algorithms. The conventional method achieved similar median performance as the machine learning models but was worse than the best machine learning models and relatively insensitive to predictor choices. Of the machine learning models, decision tree algorithms performed the best in cross-validation experiments, even with a baseline predictor set, and artificial neural networks showed comparable performance when using all predictors. Soil temperature was frequently the most important predictor whilst water table depth was important at sites with substantial water table fluctuations, highlighting the value of data on wetland soil conditions. Raw gap-filling uncertainties from the machine learning models were underestimated and we propose a method to calibrate uncertainties to observations. The python code for model development, evaluation, and uncertainty estimation is publicly available. This study outlines a modular and robust machine learning workflow and makes recommendations for, and evaluates an improved baseline of, methane gap-filling models that can be implemented in multi-site syntheses or standardized products from regional and global flux networks (e.g., FLUXNET).

DOI bib
Identifying dominant environmental predictors of freshwater wetland methane fluxes across diurnal to seasonal time scales
Sara Knox, Sheel Bansal, Gavin McNicol, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Cove Sturtevant, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Dennis Baldocchi, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Jinxun Liu, Annalea Lohila, Avni Malhotra, Lulie Melling, W. J. Riley, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Jessica Turner, Rodrigo Vargas, Qing Zhu, Tuula Alto, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Mathias Goeckede, Joe R. Melton, Oliver Sonnentag, Timo Vesala, Eric J. Ward, Zhen Zhang, Sarah Féron, Zutao Ouyang, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Jiquan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Gerald Jurasinski, Minseok Kang, Franziska Koebsch, Ivan Mammarella, Mats B. Nilsson, Keisuke Ono, Matthias Peichl, Olli Peltola, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Jed P. Sparks, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, George L. Vourlitis, Guan Xhuan Wong, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Sara Knox, Sheel Bansal, Gavin McNicol, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Cove Sturtevant, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Dennis Baldocchi, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Jinxun Liu, Annalea Lohila, Avni Malhotra, Lulie Melling, W. J. Riley, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Jessica Turner, Rodrigo Vargas, Qing Zhu, Tuula Alto, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Mathias Goeckede, Joe R. Melton, Oliver Sonnentag, Timo Vesala, Eric J. Ward, Zhen Zhang, Sarah Féron, Zutao Ouyang, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Jiquan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Gerald Jurasinski, Minseok Kang, Franziska Koebsch, Ivan Mammarella, Mats B. Nilsson, Keisuke Ono, Matthias Peichl, Olli Peltola, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Jed P. Sparks, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, George L. Vourlitis, Guan Xhuan Wong, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson
Global Change Biology, Volume 27, Issue 15

While wetlands are the largest natural source of methane (CH4) to the atmosphere, they represent a large source of uncertainty in the global CH4 budget due to the complex biogeochemical controls on CH4 dynamics. Here we present, to our knowledge, the first multi-site synthesis of how predictors of CH4 fluxes (FCH4) in freshwater wetlands vary across wetland types at diel, multiday (synoptic), and seasonal time scales. We used several statistical approaches (correlation analysis, generalized additive modeling, mutual information, and random forests) in a wavelet-based multi-resolution framework to assess the importance of environmental predictors, nonlinearities and lags on FCH4 across 23 eddy covariance sites. Seasonally, soil and air temperature were dominant predictors of FCH4 at sites with smaller seasonal variation in water table depth (WTD). In contrast, WTD was the dominant predictor for wetlands with smaller variations in temperature (e.g., seasonal tropical/subtropical wetlands). Changes in seasonal FCH4 lagged fluctuations in WTD by ~17 ± 11 days, and lagged air and soil temperature by median values of 8 ± 16 and 5 ± 15 days, respectively. Temperature and WTD were also dominant predictors at the multiday scale. Atmospheric pressure (PA) was another important multiday scale predictor for peat-dominated sites, with drops in PA coinciding with synchronous releases of CH4. At the diel scale, synchronous relationships with latent heat flux and vapor pressure deficit suggest that physical processes controlling evaporation and boundary layer mixing exert similar controls on CH4 volatilization, and suggest the influence of pressurized ventilation in aerenchymatous vegetation. In addition, 1- to 4-h lagged relationships with ecosystem photosynthesis indicate recent carbon substrates, such as root exudates, may also control FCH4. By addressing issues of scale, asynchrony, and nonlinearity, this work improves understanding of the predictors and timing of wetland FCH4 that can inform future studies and models, and help constrain wetland CH4 emissions.

DOI bib
Identifying dominant environmental predictors of freshwater wetland methane fluxes across diurnal to seasonal time scales
Sara Knox, Sheel Bansal, Gavin McNicol, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Cove Sturtevant, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Dennis Baldocchi, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Jinxun Liu, Annalea Lohila, Avni Malhotra, Lulie Melling, W. J. Riley, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Jessica Turner, Rodrigo Vargas, Qing Zhu, Tuula Alto, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Mathias Goeckede, Joe R. Melton, Oliver Sonnentag, Timo Vesala, Eric J. Ward, Zhen Zhang, Sarah Féron, Zutao Ouyang, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Jiquan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Gerald Jurasinski, Minseok Kang, Franziska Koebsch, Ivan Mammarella, Mats B. Nilsson, Keisuke Ono, Matthias Peichl, Olli Peltola, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Jed P. Sparks, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, George L. Vourlitis, Guan Xhuan Wong, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson, Sara Knox, Sheel Bansal, Gavin McNicol, Karina V. R. Schäfer, Cove Sturtevant, Masahito Ueyama, Alex Valach, Dennis Baldocchi, Kyle Delwiche, Ankur R. Desai, E. S. Euskirchen, Jinxun Liu, Annalea Lohila, Avni Malhotra, Lulie Melling, W. J. Riley, Benjamin R. K. Runkle, Jessica Turner, Rodrigo Vargas, Qing Zhu, Tuula Alto, Etienne Fluet‐Chouinard, Mathias Goeckede, Joe R. Melton, Oliver Sonnentag, Timo Vesala, Eric J. Ward, Zhen Zhang, Sarah Féron, Zutao Ouyang, Pavel Alekseychik, Mika Aurela, Gil Bohrer, David I. Campbell, Jiquan Chen, Housen Chu, Higo J. Dalmagro, Jordan P. Goodrich, Pia Gottschalk, Takashi Hirano, Hiroki Iwata, Gerald Jurasinski, Minseok Kang, Franziska Koebsch, Ivan Mammarella, Mats B. Nilsson, Keisuke Ono, Matthias Peichl, Olli Peltola, Youngryel Ryu, Torsten Sachs, Ayaka Sakabe, Jed P. Sparks, Eeva‐Stiina Tuittila, George L. Vourlitis, Guan Xhuan Wong, L. Windham‐Myers, Benjamin Poulter, Robert B. Jackson
Global Change Biology, Volume 27, Issue 15

While wetlands are the largest natural source of methane (CH4) to the atmosphere, they represent a large source of uncertainty in the global CH4 budget due to the complex biogeochemical controls on CH4 dynamics. Here we present, to our knowledge, the first multi-site synthesis of how predictors of CH4 fluxes (FCH4) in freshwater wetlands vary across wetland types at diel, multiday (synoptic), and seasonal time scales. We used several statistical approaches (correlation analysis, generalized additive modeling, mutual information, and random forests) in a wavelet-based multi-resolution framework to assess the importance of environmental predictors, nonlinearities and lags on FCH4 across 23 eddy covariance sites. Seasonally, soil and air temperature were dominant predictors of FCH4 at sites with smaller seasonal variation in water table depth (WTD). In contrast, WTD was the dominant predictor for wetlands with smaller variations in temperature (e.g., seasonal tropical/subtropical wetlands). Changes in seasonal FCH4 lagged fluctuations in WTD by ~17 ± 11 days, and lagged air and soil temperature by median values of 8 ± 16 and 5 ± 15 days, respectively. Temperature and WTD were also dominant predictors at the multiday scale. Atmospheric pressure (PA) was another important multiday scale predictor for peat-dominated sites, with drops in PA coinciding with synchronous releases of CH4. At the diel scale, synchronous relationships with latent heat flux and vapor pressure deficit suggest that physical processes controlling evaporation and boundary layer mixing exert similar controls on CH4 volatilization, and suggest the influence of pressurized ventilation in aerenchymatous vegetation. In addition, 1- to 4-h lagged relationships with ecosystem photosynthesis indicate recent carbon substrates, such as root exudates, may also control FCH4. By addressing issues of scale, asynchrony, and nonlinearity, this work improves understanding of the predictors and timing of wetland FCH4 that can inform future studies and models, and help constrain wetland CH4 emissions.

2019

DOI bib
Vegetation Functional Properties Determine Uncertainty of Simulated Ecosystem Productivity: A Traceability Analysis in the East Asian Monsoon Region
Erqian Cui, Kun Huang, M. Altaf Arain, Joshua B. Fisher, D. N. Huntzinger, Akihiko Ito, Yiqi Luo, Atul K. Jain, Jiafu Mao, A. M. Michalak, Shuli Niu, Nicholas C. Parazoo, Changhui Peng, Shushi Peng, Benjamin Poulter, D. M. Ricciuto, Kevin Schaefer, Christopher R. Schwalm, Xiaoying Shi, Hanqin Tian, Weile Wang, Jinsong Wang, Yaxing Wei, En‐Rong Yan, Liming Yan, Ning Zeng, Qiuan Zhu, Jianyang Xia
Global Biogeochemical Cycles, Volume 33, Issue 6

Global and regional projections of climate change by Earth system models are limited by their uncertain estimates of terrestrial ecosystem productivity. At the middle to low latitudes, the East Asian monsoon region has higher productivity than forests in Europe‐Africa and North America, but its estimate by current generation of terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs) has seldom been systematically evaluated. Here, we developed a traceability framework to evaluate the simulated gross primary productivity (GPP) by 15 TBMs in the East Asian monsoon region. The framework links GPP to net primary productivity, biomass, leaf area and back to GPP via incorporating multiple vegetation functional properties of carbon‐use efficiency (CUE), vegetation C turnover time (τveg), leaf C fraction (Fleaf), specific leaf area (SLA), and leaf area index (LAI)‐level photosynthesis (PLAI), respectively. We then applied a relative importance algorithm to attribute intermodel variation at each node. The results showed that large intermodel variation in GPP over 1901–2010 were mainly propagated from their different representation of vegetation functional properties. For example, SLA explained 77% of the intermodel difference in leaf area, which contributed 90% to the simulated GPP differences. In addition, the models simulated higher CUE (18.1 ± 21.3%), τveg (18.2 ± 26.9%), and SLA (27.4±36.5%) than observations, leading to the overestimation of simulated GPP across the East Asian monsoon region. These results suggest the large uncertainty of current TBMs in simulating GPP is largely propagated from their poor representation of the vegetation functional properties and call for a better understanding of the covariations between plant functional properties in terrestrial ecosystems.

DOI bib
Global vegetation biomass production efficiency constrained by models and observations
Yue He, Shushi Peng, Yongwen Liu, Xiangyi Li, Kai Wang, Philippe Ciais, M. Altaf Arain, Yuanyuan Fang, Joshua B. Fisher, Daniel S. Goll, Daniel J. Hayes, D. N. Huntzinger, Akihiko Ito, Atul K. Jain, Ivan A. Janssens, Jiafu Mao, Matteo Campioli, A. M. Michalak, Changhui Peng, Josep Peñuelas, Benjamin Poulter, Dahe Qin, D. M. Ricciuto, Kevin Schaefer, Christopher R. Schwalm, Xiaoying Shi, Hanqin Tian, Sara Vicca, Yaxing Wei, Ning Zeng, Qiuan Zhu
Global Change Biology, Volume 26, Issue 3

Plants use only a fraction of their photosynthetically derived carbon for biomass production (BP). The biomass production efficiency (BPE), defined as the ratio of BP to photosynthesis, and its variation across and within vegetation types is poorly understood, which hinders our capacity to accurately estimate carbon turnover times and carbon sinks. Here, we present a new global estimation of BPE obtained by combining field measurements from 113 sites with 14 carbon cycle models. Our best estimate of global BPE is 0.41 ± 0.05, excluding cropland. The largest BPE is found in boreal forests (0.48 ± 0.06) and the lowest in tropical forests (0.40 ± 0.04). Carbon cycle models overestimate BPE, although models with carbon-nitrogen interactions tend to be more realistic. Using observation-based estimates of global photosynthesis, we quantify the global BP of non-cropland ecosystems of 41 ± 6 Pg C/year. This flux is less than net primary production as it does not contain carbon allocated to symbionts, used for exudates or volatile carbon compound emissions to the atmosphere. Our study reveals a positive bias of 24 ± 11% in the model-estimated BP (10 of 14 models). When correcting models for this bias while leaving modeled carbon turnover times unchanged, we found that the global ecosystem carbon storage change during the last century is decreased by 67% (or 58 Pg C).

DOI bib
Field-experiment constraints on the enhancement of the terrestrial carbon sink by CO2 fertilization
Yongwen Liu, Shilong Piao, Thomas Gasser, Philippe Ciais, Hui Yang, Han Wang, Trevor F. Keenan, Mengtian Huang, Shiqiang Wan, Jian Song, Kai Wang, Ivan A. Janssens, Josep Peñuelas, Chris Huntingford, Xuhui Wang, M. Altaf Arain, Yuanyuan Fang, Joshua B. Fisher, Maoyi Huang, D. N. Huntzinger, Akihiko Ito, Atul K. Jain, Jiafu Mao, A. M. Michalak, Changhui Peng, Benjamin Poulter, Christopher R. Schwalm, Xiaoying Shi, Hanqin Tian, Yaxing Wei, Ning Zeng, Qiuan Zhu, Tao Wang
Nature Geoscience, Volume 12, Issue 10

Clarifying how increased atmospheric CO2 concentration (eCO2) contributes to accelerated land carbon sequestration remains important since this process is the largest negative feedback in the coupled carbon–climate system. Here, we constrain the sensitivity of the terrestrial carbon sink to eCO2 over the temperate Northern Hemisphere for the past five decades, using 12 terrestrial ecosystem models and data from seven CO2 enrichment experiments. This constraint uses the heuristic finding that the northern temperate carbon sink sensitivity to eCO2 is linearly related to the site-scale sensitivity across the models. The emerging data-constrained eCO2 sensitivity is 0.64 ± 0.28 PgC yr−1 per hundred ppm of eCO2. Extrapolating worldwide, this northern temperate sensitivity projects the global terrestrial carbon sink to increase by 3.5 ± 1.9 PgC yr−1 for an increase in CO2 of 100 ppm. This value suggests that CO2 fertilization alone explains most of the observed increase in global land carbon sink since the 1960s. More CO2 enrichment experiments, particularly in boreal, arctic and tropical ecosystems, are required to explain further the responsible processes. The northern temperate carbon sink is estimated to increase by 0.64 PgC each year for each increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations by 100 ppm, suggests an analysis of data from field experiments at 7 sites constraints.

DOI bib
Large loss of CO2 in winter observed across the northern permafrost region
Susan M. Natali, Jennifer D. Watts, Brendan M. Rogers, Stefano Potter, S. Ludwig, A. K. Selbmann, Patrick F. Sullivan, Benjamin W. Abbott, Kyle A. Arndt, Leah Birch, Mats P. Björkman, A. Anthony Bloom, Gerardo Celis, Torben R. Christensen, Casper T. Christiansen, R. Commane, Elisabeth J. Cooper, P. M. Crill, C. I. Czimczik, S. P. Davydov, Jinyang Du, J. E. Egan, Bo Elberling, E. S. Euskirchen, Thomas Friborg, Hélène Genet, Mathias Göckede, Jordan P. Goodrich, Paul Grogan, Manuel Helbig, Elchin Jafarov, Julie Jastrow, Aram Kalhori, Yongwon Kim, John S. Kimball, Lars Kutzbach, Mark J. Lara, Klaus Steenberg Larsen, Bang-Yong Lee, Zhihua Liu, M. M. Loranty, Magnus Lund, Massimo Lupascu, Nima Madani, Avni Malhotra, Roser Matamala, Jack W. McFarland, A. David McGuire, Anders Michelsen, Christina Minions, Walter C. Oechel, David Olefeldt, Frans‐Jan W. Parmentier, Norbert Pirk, Benjamin Poulter, W. L. Quinton, Fereidoun Rezanezhad, David Risk, Torsten Sachs, Kevin Schaefer, Niels Martin Schmidt, Edward A. G. Schuur, Philipp Semenchuk, Gaius R. Shaver, Oliver Sonnentag, Gregory Starr, Claire C. Treat, Mark P. Waldrop, Yihui Wang, J. M. Welker, Christian Wille, Xiaofeng Xu, Zhen Zhang, Qianlai Zhuang, Donatella Zona
Nature Climate Change, Volume 9, Issue 11

Recent warming in the Arctic, which has been amplified during the winter1-3, greatly enhances microbial decomposition of soil organic matter and subsequent release of carbon dioxide (CO2)4. However, the amount of CO2 released in winter is highly uncertain and has not been well represented by ecosystem models or by empirically-based estimates5,6. Here we synthesize regional in situ observations of CO2 flux from arctic and boreal soils to assess current and future winter carbon losses from the northern permafrost domain. We estimate a contemporary loss of 1662 Tg C yr-1 from the permafrost region during the winter season (October through April). This loss is greater than the average growing season carbon uptake for this region estimated from process models (-1032 Tg C yr-1). Extending model predictions to warmer conditions in 2100 indicates that winter CO2 emissions will increase 17% under a moderate mitigation scenario-Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5-and 41% under business-as-usual emissions scenario-RCP 8.5. Our results provide a new baseline for winter CO2 emissions from northern terrestrial regions and indicate that enhanced soil CO2 loss due to winter warming may offset growing season carbon uptake under future climatic conditions.

2018

DOI bib
Missing pieces to modeling the Arctic-Boreal puzzle
Joshua B. Fisher, Daniel J. Hayes, Christopher R. Schwalm, D. N. Huntzinger, Eric Stofferahn, Kevin Schaefer, Yiqi Luo, Stan D. Wullschleger, S. J. Goetz, Charles E. Miller, P. C. Griffith, Sarah Chadburn, Abhishek Chatterjee, Philippe Ciais, Thomas A. Douglas, Hélène Genet, Akihiko Ito, C. S. R. Neigh, Benjamin Poulter, Brendan M. Rogers, Oliver Sonnentag, Hanqin Tian, Weile Wang, Yongkang Xue, Zong‐Liang Yang, Ning Zeng, Zhen Zhang
Environmental Research Letters, Volume 13, Issue 2

Author(s): Fisher, JB; Hayes, DJ; Schwalm, CR; Huntzinger, DN; Stofferahn, E; Schaefer, K; Luo, Y; Wullschleger, SD; Goetz, S; Miller, CE; Griffith, P; Chadburn, S; Chatterjee, A; Ciais, P; Douglas, TA; Genet, H; Ito, A; Neigh, CSR; Poulter, B; Rogers, BM; Sonnentag, O; Tian, H; Wang, W; Xue, Y; Yang, ZL; Zeng, N; Zhang, Z | Abstract: NASA has launched the decade-long Arctic-Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE). While the initial phases focus on field and airborne data collection, early integration with modeling activities is important to benefit future modeling syntheses. We compiled feedback from ecosystem modeling teams on key data needs, which encompass carbon biogeochemistry, vegetation, permafrost, hydrology, and disturbance dynamics. A suite of variables was identified as part of this activity with a critical requirement that they are collected concurrently and representatively over space and time. Individual projects in ABoVE may not capture all these needs, and thus there is both demand and opportunity for the augmentation of field observations, and synthesis of the observations that are collected, to ensure that science questions and integrated modeling activities are successfully implemented.
Search
Co-authors
Venues