The North American Carbon Program Site-level Interim Synthesis Model Data Comparison (NACP Site Synthesis) Daniel Ricciuto, Peter Thornton, Kevin Schaefer,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Why gap filling isn’t always easy Andrew Richardson University of New Hampshire Jena Gap Filling Workshop September 2006.
Advertisements

Multi-Scale Synthesis and Terrestrial Model Intercomparison Project – A Systematic Approach for Evaluating Land-Atmosphere Flux Estimates February 4 th,
Responses of terrestrial ecosystems to drought
Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy North American Carbon Balance – Results from the Regional Synthesis Project of the North America Carbon.
Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Estimating the North American Carbon Balance Using Inter- Comparison Among Inversions, Regional Terrestrial.
CarbonFusion meeting, 4 or 5 June 2008 Building from the bottom-up and learning as we go: data requirements for upscaling ecosystem function Paul Stoy.
Objective –Attempt to utilize flux tower records to evaluate the validity of continental flux estimates submitted to the regional interim synthesis activity.
Uncertainty in eddy covariance datasets Dario Papale, Markus Reichstein, Antje Moffat, Ankur Desai, many others..
The North American Carbon Program: An Overview for AmeriFlux investigators Kenneth Davis The Pennsylvania State University Co-chair, NACP Science Steering.
Cross-spectral analysis on Net Ecosystem Exchange: Dominant timescale and correlations among key ecosystem variables over the Ameriflux Harvard forest.
Raw data Hz HH data submitted for synthesis Flux calculation, raw data filtering Additional filtering for footprint or instrument malfunctioning.
The observed responses of ecosystem CO2 exchange to climate variation from diurnal to annual time scale in the northern America. C. Yi, K.J. Davis, The.
Page 1GMES - ENSEMBLES 2008 ENSEMBLES. Page 2GMES - ENSEMBLES 2008 The ENSEMBLES Project  Began 4 years ago, will end in December 2009  Supported by.
Interannual variability across sites: Bridging the gap between flux towers and flasks Goals Obtain a mechanistic understanding of tower-scale interannual.
Phenological responses of NEE in the subboreal Controls on IAV by autumn zero- crossing and soil thermal profile Dr. Desai.
Optimising ORCHIDEE simulations at tropical sites Hans Verbeeck LSM/FLUXNET meeting June 2008, Edinburgh LSCE, Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de.
Regional Model-Data Comparison: An NACP Interim Synthesis Project Coordinators: Andy Jacobson, Mac Post, Debbie Huntzinger, Bob Cook Participants: Dozens.
Paul R. Moorcroft David Medvigy, Stephen Wofsy, J. William Munger, M. Dietze Harvard University Developing a predictive science of the biosphere.
New FLUXDATA collection Aim of the presentation: get feedbacks and suggestions from you in the next days.
FLUXNET: Measuring CO 2 and Water Vapor Fluxes Across a Global Network Dennis Baldocchi ESPM/Ecosystem Science Div. University of California, Berkeley.
The role of the Chequamegon Ecosystem-Atmosphere Study in the U.S. Carbon Cycle Science Plan Ken Davis The Pennsylvania State University The 13 th ChEAS.
FLUXNET and Remote Sensing Open Workshop Mathias Goeckede, Natascha Kljun, Laura Chasmer Topic 3: Fluxes, Hyperspectral Remote Sensing and Upscaling.
O AK R IDGE N ATIONAL L ABORATORY U. S. D EPARTMENT OF E NERGY 1 Vegetation/Ecosystem Modeling and Analysis Project (VEMAP) Lessons Learned or How to Do.
BIOME-BGC estimates fluxes and storage of energy, water, carbon, and nitrogen for the vegetation and soil components of terrestrial ecosystems. Model algorithms.
Long term weather and flux data: treatment of discontinuous data. Bart Kruijt, Wilma Jans, Cor Jacobs, Eddy Moors Loobos.
Summary Report of Working Group on Impacts Project ABC Science Team Meeting April 5, 2005 UNEP-Tongji Institute, Shanghai.
Translation to the New TCO Panel Beverly Law Prof. Global Change Forest Science Science Chair, AmeriFlux Network Oregon State University.
Characterizing observational and model uncertainty Kusum Naithani Department of Geography The Pennsylvania State University ChEAS 2012 Workshop.
Using FLUXNET data to evaluate land surface models Ray Leuning and Gab Abramowitz 4 – 6 June 2008.
Integration of biosphere and atmosphere observations Yingping Wang 1, Gabriel Abramowitz 1, Rachel Law 1, Bernard Pak 1, Cathy Trudinger 1, Ian Enting.
Some challenges of model-data- integration a collection of issues and ideas based on model evaluation excercises Martin Jung, Miguel Mahecha, Markus Reichstein,
Evaluation of land model simulations across multiple sites and multiple models: Results from the NACP site-level synthesis effort Peter Thornton 1, Gautam.
Satellite data, ecosystem models and site data: contributions of the IGBP flux network to carbon cycle science David Schimel, Galina Churkina, Eva Falge,
AmeriFlux and FLUXNET Report Dennis Baldocchi Bev Law AsiaFlux Workshop, 2008, Seoul, Korea.
Gap-filling workshop, Jena 09/2006Markus Reichstein Gap-filling: What, why, how? - an Introduction Gap-filling Comparison Workshop, September 18-20, 2006.
Research Progress Discussions of Coordinated Emissions Research Suggestions to Guide this Initiative Focus on research emission inventories Do not interfere.
Impacts of leaf phenology and water table on interannual variability of carbon fluxes in subboreal uplands and wetlands Implications for regional fluxes.
CDIAC AmeriFlux Data Management Tom Boden (Bai Yang) Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Presented.
Application of the ORCHIDEE global vegetation model to evaluate biomass and soil carbon stocks of Qinghai-Tibetan grasslands Tan Kun.
Site-Level Model-Data Comparison A Proposed NACP Interim Synthesis Project Ken Davis, Peter Thornton, Kevin Schaefer, Dan Riciutto Coordinators.
Evaluation and simulation of global terrestrial latent heat flux by merging CMIP5 climate models and surface eddy covariance observations Yunjun Yao 1,
Variations in Continental Terrestrial Primary Production, Evapotranspiration and Disturbance Faith Ann Heinsch, Maosheng Zhao, Qiaozhen Mu, David Mildrexler,
Outlier Analyses What is an outlier? data point unrepresentative of its general location or otherwise “difficult” to represent by a generalized NPP model.
Cyberinfrastructure to promote Model - Data Integration Robert Cook, Yaxing Wei, and Suresh S. Vannan Oak Ridge National Laboratory Presented at the Model-Data.
WP3 WP6 USE CASE DATA MODEL FUSION USING PHENOLOGICAL DATA TO INFORM PRODUCTIVITY MODEL Andy Fox, David Moore, Jesus Marco de Lucas, Jeff Taylor, and many.
Flux Measurements and Systematic Terrestrial Measurements 1.discuss gaps and opportunities What are gaps? 2. brainstorm ideas about collaborative projects.
Biases in land surface models Yingping Wang CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research.
Evapotranspiration Estimates over Canada based on Observed, GR2 and NARR forcings Korolevich, V., Fernandes, R., Wang, S., Simic, A., Gong, F. Natural.
Breakout Session Assignments and Goals. Summary of Objectives and Charge to Breakout Groups Desired outcome: a comprehensive vision for NACP Data Management.
Edinburgh, June 2008Markus Reichstein Critical issues when using flux data for reducing Land Surfcace Model uncertainties – towards full uncertainty accounting?
NARCCAP Meeting September 2009 Results from NCEP-driven RCMs ~ Overview ~ Results from NCEP-driven RCMs ~ Overview ~ William J. Gutowski, Jr. & Raymond.
Fluxnet 2009 Progress Dennis Baldocchi, Rodrigo Vargas, Youngryel Ryu, Markus Reichstein, Dario Papale, Deb Agarwal, Catharine Van Ingen AmeriFlux 2009.
Uncertainty in eddy covariance data and its relevance to gap filling David HollingerAndrew Richardson USDA Forest ServiceUniversity of New Hampshire Durham,
Using AmeriFlux Observations in the NACP Site-level Interim Synthesis Kevin Schaefer NACP Site Synthesis Team Flux Tower PIs Modeling Teams.
Comparing Simulated and Observed Gross Primary Productivity Kevin Schaefer, Altaf Arain, Alan Barr, Jing Chen, Ken Davis, Dimitre Dimitrov, Ni Golaz, Timothy.
A Modeling and Synthesis Thematic Data Center for the North American Carbon Program Robert B. Cook 1, Yaxing Wei 1, W. Mac Post 1, Peter E. Thornton 1,
Data assimilation as a tool for C cycle studies Collaborators: P Stoy, J Evans, C Lloyd, A Prieto Blanco, M Disney, L Street, A Fox (Sheffield) M Van Wijk.
CLM-CN Update: Progress toward CLM4.0 Peter Thornton, Sam Levis and the C-LAMP team.
Success and Failure of Implementing Data-driven Upscaling Using Flux Networks and Remote Sensing Jingfeng Xiao Complex Systems Research Center, University.
State of the Carbon Cycle (NACP and GCP): Have components and their uncertainties changed over time? Anna M. Michalak With contributions from: Kevin Bowman,
A model-data intercomparison of CO 2 exchange across North America: Results from the North American Carbon Program Site Synthesis Christopher R Schwalm.
Spatial Coherence of NEE Response of Different Ecosystems to the Same Climate Anomaly Martha Butler 1, Ken Davis 1, Peter Bakwin 2, David Hollinger 3,
Ring2.psu.edu Natasha Miles, Scott Richardson, Ken Davis, and Eric Crosson American Geophysical Union Annual Meeting 2008: 17 Dec 2008 Temporal and spatial.
Results from the Reflex experiment Mathew Williams, Andrew Fox and the Reflex team.
CT2 : Assessing sources of uncertainty in ocean analysis and forecasts We consider the structural sources of uncertainty generic to all practical forecasting.
Research Progress Discussions of Coordinated Emissions Research Suggestions to Guide this Initiative Focus on research emission inventories Do not interfere.
Comparison of GPP from Terra-MODIS and AmeriFlux Network Towers
Ecosystem Demography model version 2 (ED2)
NACP Site MDC “Are the various measurement and modeling estimates of carbon fluxes consistent with each other - and if not, why?” Simulated vs. observed.
Comparing Simulated and Observed Gross Primary Productivity
Presentation transcript:

The North American Carbon Program Site-level Interim Synthesis Model Data Comparison (NACP Site Synthesis) Daniel Ricciuto, Peter Thornton, Kevin Schaefer, Kenneth Davis Flux Tower PIs Modeling Teams NACP Site Synthesis Team

Site Synthesis Objectives Activity initiated in 2008 by NACP to answer: - Are the various measurement and modeling estimates of carbon fluxes consistent with each other - and if not, why? Quantify model and observation uncertaintyQuantify model and observation uncertainty 58 flux tower sites; 29 models 58 flux tower sites; 29 models Gap-filled observed weather Gap-filled observed weather Observed fluxes, uncertainty, ancillary data Observed fluxes, uncertainty, ancillary data Link model performance to model structureLink model performance to model structure Which model characteristics associated with “best” models? Which model characteristics associated with “best” models? How does this performance vary among sites? How does this performance vary among sites?

Flux Tower Sites AmeriFlux sites over 35 sites Data provided by CDIAC Standardized “Level 2” format Canadian sites Over 15 sites Data provided by - La Thuile synthesis activity - FLUXNET Canada Site selection based on: Representativeness of biomes Length of record Quality of data - gap fraction Ancillary data availability Meteorological drivers and flux observations gap-filled by NACP synthesis team

Models Results submitted from 22 models to dateResults submitted from 22 models to date On average 10 simulations per siteOn average 10 simulations per site Total of over 1000 simulated site yearsTotal of over 1000 simulated site years

Analysis Projects

Selected results Observed flux uncertainty (Barr et al.) NEE: random, U* filtering, gap-fillingNEE: random, U* filtering, gap-filling GPP & Re: random, U* filtering, gap-filling, partitioningGPP & Re: random, U* filtering, gap-filling, partitioning Random UncertaintyU* Threshold Uncertainty

Selected results Overall model performance (Schwalm et al.) Taylor Skill Normalized Mean Absolute Error Chi-squared Based on monthly model-data differences Large spread among models, sites Perfect Model

Taylor Skill by Model Characteristics (Schwalm et al.[2010])

Spectral NEE Error (Dietze et al.) Diurnal Annual Noise level based on NEE observation uncertainty Largest errors associated with diurnal and annual cycles Large variation in performance at synoptic scales

Phenology (Richardson et al.) Harvard ForestHarvard Forest Leafout too earlyLeafout too early Senescence too lateSenescence too late Errors of days based on NEEErrors of days based on NEE Errors in GPP/NEE correlated with LAI in spring, but not autumnErrors in GPP/NEE correlated with LAI in spring, but not autumn

Future work Objectives for new simulationsObjectives for new simulations Non steady-state Non steady-state Previous simulations assumed steady state, not consistent with observed fluxes Previous simulations assumed steady state, not consistent with observed fluxes Incorporate known information about disturbance history Incorporate known information about disturbance history Under-analyzed biomes Under-analyzed biomes e.g. wetland, tundra e.g. wetland, tundra Model sensitivity analyses Model sensitivity analyses Good idea of inter-model uncertainty, but intra-model uncertainty? Good idea of inter-model uncertainty, but intra-model uncertainty? What are the key parameters? What are the key parameters? Recruit more modeling teamsRecruit more modeling teams Invite wetland modeling teams Invite wetland modeling teams Expand number of IPCC GCMs Expand number of IPCC GCMs Coordinate with other synthesesCoordinate with other syntheses LBA DMIP LBA DMIP NACP regional interim synthesis, MsTIMIP NACP regional interim synthesis, MsTIMIP Make our database more visible, user-friendlyMake our database more visible, user-friendly 29 potential analysis teams making use of interim synthesis dataset 29 potential analysis teams making use of interim synthesis dataset Long-term, dynamic dataset Long-term, dynamic dataset Coordinate with CDIAC, La Thuile, ESG, other activities Coordinate with CDIAC, La Thuile, ESG, other activities

Summary Highly collaborative effort, made possible byHighly collaborative effort, made possible by Efforts (largely unfunded) of model and tower investigators Efforts (largely unfunded) of model and tower investigators Bringing together data, model and observation communities Bringing together data, model and observation communities A productive series of workshops discussing protocol, analysis A productive series of workshops discussing protocol, analysis Standardized inputs and flux observations Standardized inputs and flux observations Coordination by NACP team, CDIAC, FLUXNET to determine and collect necessary ancillary data for models not already available Coordination by NACP team, CDIAC, FLUXNET to determine and collect necessary ancillary data for models not already available Valuable dataset for model developersValuable dataset for model developers First formal estimates of observation uncertainty in a standard dataset First formal estimates of observation uncertainty in a standard dataset Testbed for regional/global models to validate against a large observation network Testbed for regional/global models to validate against a large observation network Opportunity for model, observation PIs to learn from each other Opportunity for model, observation PIs to learn from each other

Additional Slides

Missing Affiliations Missing Model Affiliations Missing Site Affiliations

Lessons Learned Baseline parameter vs. structureBaseline parameter vs. structure Std vs. CADM parameter runs Std vs. CADM parameter runs Better way to process submission filesBetter way to process submission files Better IC criteria and dataBetter IC criteria and data Need so many sites?Need so many sites? Focus on what we do not have Focus on what we do not have Not random missing sites: which are missing? Not random missing sites: which are missing? NSS vs SS runsNSS vs SS runs Coordinate model needs with Site data collectionsCoordinate model needs with Site data collections Better detail site info/ancillary data (tree bands, resp chambers) Better detail site info/ancillary data (tree bands, resp chambers) Mike Dietze leaf level photosynthesis Mike Dietze leaf level photosynthesis Need support for background/CADM data Need support for background/CADM data Weeks per CADM file Weeks per CADM file Central lab model e.g., for leaf N Central lab model e.g., for leaf N Encourage repository for data, esp ancillary data Encourage repository for data, esp ancillary data

Lessons learned Chance to improve model (not tuning, use CADM)Chance to improve model (not tuning, use CADM) Clarify protocol not “out of box” Clarify protocol not “out of box” Need better phenology obsNeed better phenology obs

New site BondvilleBondville Not much anc data Not much anc data PermafrostPermafrost Daring Lake, Toolik Lake, other Canadian sites Daring Lake, Toolik Lake, other Canadian sites 8-mile lake (schuur) 8-mile lake (schuur) Chronosequence sites (priority 3 UCI)Chronosequence sites (priority 3 UCI) Augment under rep biomesAugment under rep biomes Grassland, savanna, shrubland, wetlands Grassland, savanna, shrubland, wetlands

Next round ObjectivesObjectives Non-SS Non-SS Under-analyzed biomes Under-analyzed biomes Sensitivity analyses Sensitivity analyses Survey existing analyses Survey existing analyses OAT few sites survey param OAT few sites survey param Recruit Model teamsRecruit Model teams Invite wetland model teams Invite wetland model teams IPCC GCMs IPCC GCMs Coordinate with LBA DMIPCoordinate with LBA DMIP LULC input to models (Peter T.)LULC input to models (Peter T.) Weather (Dan R.)Weather (Dan R.) SupportSupport Money to model teams, proposal to CCIWG Money to model teams, proposal to CCIWG Postdoc to coordinate Postdoc to coordinate

Improving Infrastructure Model submission tool (alma_var)Model submission tool (alma_var) Standard model processing (Dan Ricciuto)Standard model processing (Dan Ricciuto) Tool to Process Barr et al. uncertainty filesTool to Process Barr et al. uncertainty files Manpower (Barbara Jackson)Manpower (Barbara Jackson) Consistency across productsConsistency across products Update Wiki and FTPUpdate Wiki and FTP

Inter-annual (Raczka et al.) Annual total NEE at US-Ha1

NEE Seasonal Cycle (Schwalm et al.) Taylor Plot: All Sites Forest sites better than non-forestForest sites better than non-forest Ag models do best at Ag sitesAg models do best at Ag sites Mean (P) and optimized model (N) do wellMean (P) and optimized model (N) do well

NEE Error by Time Scale (Dietze et al.)

GPP All Sites (Schaefer et al.) Mean is best Optimized Unit Problems? Top 3 models for NEE

GPP Bias and Phenology Bias (  mol m -2 s -1 ) CA-Ca1 US-Ne3

What does all this mean? Model performance varies with structureModel performance varies with structure Peak NEE error at 1 day and 1 year periodPeak NEE error at 1 day and 1 year period Bias & phenology dominate GPP errorBias & phenology dominate GPP error GPP error large source of NEE errorGPP error large source of NEE error Must link model structure with performanceMust link model structure with performance

Flux Tower Sites

Disturbance Uncertainty ORCHIDEE at 1850 burn site, Manitoba

NEE Seasonal Cycle US-UMBCA-MerCA-Ca1 BestTypicalWorst

GPP Seasonal Cycle CA-Ca1 US-Ne3 CA-Mer BestTypicalWorst

NEE Diurnal Cycle CA-Ca1CA-ObsUS-Ha1 BestTypicalWorst

GPP Diurnal Cycle CA-Ca1CA-ObsCA-Oas BestTypicalWorst

Uncertainty at Diurnal Time Scale Corn Year Soybean Year Mead rain-fed corn-soy rotation site (Nebraska)

Observed Flux Uncertainty (Based on Richardson et al., 2006, Ag. For. Met. 136:1-18)