Multi-scale observation and cross-scale mechanistic modeling on terrestrial ecosystem carbon cycle

CAO Mingkui（Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China）　
YU Guirui（Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China）　
LIU Jiyuan（Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China）　
LI Kerang（Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China）　

Abstract：To predict global climate change and to implement the Kyoto Protocol for stabilizing atmospheric greenhouse gases concentrations require quantifying spatio-temporal variations in the terrestrial carbon sink accurately. During the past decade multi-scale ecological experiment and observation networks have been established using various new technologies (e.g. controlled environmental facilities, eddy covariance techniques and quantitative remote sensing), and have obtained a large amount of data about terrestrial ecosystem carbon cycle. However, uncertainties in the magnitude and spatio-temporal variations of the terrestrial carbon sink and in understanding the underlying mechanisms have not been reduced significantly. One of the major reasons is that the observations and experiments were conducted at individual scales independently, but it is the interactions of factors and processes at different scales that determine the dynamics of the terrestrial carbon sink. Since experiments and observations are always conducted at specific scales, to understand cross-scale interactions requires mechanistic analysis that is best to be achieved by mechanistic modeling. However, mechanistic ecosystem models are mainly based on data from single-scale experiments and observations and hence have no capacity to simulate mechanistic cross-scale interconnection and interactions of ecosystem processes. New-generation mechanistic ecosystem models based on new ecological theoretical framework are needed to quantify the mechanisms from micro-level fast eco-physiological responses to macro-level slow acclimation in the pattern and structure in disturbed ecosystems. Multi-scale data-model fusion is a recently emerging approach to assimilate multi-scale observational data into mechanistic, dynamic modeling, in which the structure and parameters of mechanistic models for simulating cross-scale interactions are optimized using multi-scale observational data. The models are validated and evaluated at different spatial and temporal scales and real-time observational data are assimilated continuously into dynamic modeling for predicting and forecasting ecosystem changes realistically. in summary, a breakthrough in terrestrial carbon sink research requires using approaches of multi-scale observations and cross-scale modeling to understand and quantify interconnections and interactions among ecosystem processes at different scales and their controls over ecosystem carbon cycle.
Keywords：global climate change, terrestrial carbon sink, multi-scale observation, data-model fusion, cross-scale mechanistic modeling.

References：

［1］Schimel, D. S., House, J. I., Hibbard, K. A. et al., Recent patterns and mechanisms of carbon exchange by terrestrial ecosystems,Nature, 2001, 414: 169-172.
［2］IGBP Terrestrial Carbon Working Group, The terrestrial carbon cycle: implications for the Kyoto Protocol, Science, 1998, 280:1393-1394.
［3］Canadell, J. G., Dickson, R., Hibbard, k., Raupach, M. et al.,Global Carbon Project (2003) Science framework and Implementation. Earth System Science Partnership (IGBP, IHDP, WCRP,DIVERSITAS) Report No. 1, Canberra, 2003.
［4］Wofsy, S. C., Harriss, R. C., The North American Carbon Program (NACP), Report of the NACP Committee of the U.S. Interagency Carbon Cycle Science Program, Washington, DC: US Global Change Research Program, 2002, 1-62.
［5］Tood T L, Schneider S H. Ecology and climate: research strategies and implications. Science, 1995, 269: 334-340.
［6］Canadell, J. G., Mooney, H. A., Baldocchi, D. D. et al., Carbon metabolism of the terrestrial biosphere: a multi-technique approach for improved understanding, Ecosystems, 2000, 3:115-130.
［7］Rastetter, E. B., Aber, J. D., Peters, D. P. C. et al., Using Mechanistic Models to Scale Ecological Processes across Space and Time. BioScience, 2003, 53:68-76
［8］Lawton, J. H., Ecological experiments with model systems, Science, 1995, 269: 328-331.
［9］Houghton, R. A., Tropical deforestation and atmospheric carbon dioxide, Climate Change, 1991, 19: 99-118.
［10］Dai, A., Fung, I. Y., Can climate variability contribute to the "missing" CO2 sink? Glob Biogeochem Cycles, 1993, 7:599-609.
［11］Smith, T. M., Shugart, H. H., The transient response of terrestrial carbon storage to a perturbed climate, Nature, 1993, 361:523-526.
［12］Hendrey, G. R., Ellsworth, D. S., Lewin, K. F. et al., A free-air enrichment system for exposing tall forest vegetation to elevated atmospheric CO2, Global Change Biology, 1999, 5:293-310.
［13］Yakir, D., Steinberg, L. das L., The use of stable isotope to study ecosystem gas exchange, Oecologia, 2000, 123:297-311.
［14］Luo, Y., Transient ecosystem responses to free-air CO2 enrichment:Experimental evidence and methods of analysis, New Phytologist,2001,152:3-8.
［15］Norby, R. J., Luo, Y., Evaluating ecosystem responses to rising atmospheric CO2 and global warming in a multi-factor world,New Phytologist, 2004, 162: 281-395.
［16］Wolfe, D. W., Gifford, R. M., Hilbert, D. et al., Integration of photosynthetic acclimation to CO2 at the whole-plant level,Global Change Biology, 1998, 4: 879-893.
［17］Rogers, H., Humphries, S. W., A mechanistic evaluation of the photosynthetic acclimation at elevated CO2, Global Change Biology, 2000, 6: 1005-1011.
［18］Schlesinger, W. H., Lichter, J., Limited carbon storage in soil and litter of experimental forest plots under increased atmospheric CO2, Nature, 2001, 411: 466-469.
［19］Norby, R. J., Hanson, P. J., O'Neill, E. G. et al., NPP of a CO2-enriched deciduous forest and the implications for carbon storage, Ecological Applications, 2002, 12:1261-1266.
［20］Oren, R. R., Ellsworth, D. S., Johnsen, K. H. et al., Soil fertility limits carbon sequestration by forest ecosystems in a CO2-enriched atmosphere, Nature, 2001, 411:469-472
［21］Pritchard, S. G., Rogers, H. H., Prior, S. A. et al., Elevated CO2and plant structure: a review, Global Change Biology, 1999, 5:807-837.
［22］Wedin, D. A., Tilman, D., Influence of nitrogen loading and species composition on the carbon balance of grasslands, Science,1996, 274: 1720-1723.
［23］Nadelhoffer, K. J., Emmett, B. A., Gundersen, P. et al., Nitrogen deposition makes a minor contribution to carbon sequestration in temperate forests, Nature, 1999, 398: 145-148.
［24］Rustad, L. E., Campbell, J. L., Marion, G. M. et al., A meta-analysis of the response of soil respiration, net nitrogen mineralization, and aboveground plant growth to experimental ecosystem warming, Oecologia, 2001, 126: 543-562.
［25］Melillo, J. M., Steudler, P. A., Aber, J. D. et al., Soil Warming and Carbon-Cycle Feedbacks to the Climate System, Science, 2002,298: 2173-2176.
［26］Giardina, C. P., Ryan, M. G., Evidence that decomposition rates of organic carbon in mineral soil do not vary with temperature, Nature, 2000, 404: 858-861.
［27］Luo. Y., Wan, S., Hui, D. et al., Acclimation of soil respiration to warming in a tall grass prairie, Nature, 2001, 413: 622-625.
［28］Oechel, W. C, Vourlitis, G. L., Hastings, S. J. et al., Acclimation of ecosystem CO2 exchange in the Alaskan Arctic in response to decadal climate warming, Nature, 2000, 406: 978-981.
［29］Baldocchi, D. D., Assessing the eddy covariance technique for evaluating carbon dioxide exchange rates of ecosystems: past,present and future, Global Change Biology, 2003, 9: 479-492.
［30］Wofsy, S. C., Goulden, M. L., Munger, J. W. et al., Net exchange of CO2 in a mid-latitude forest, Science, 1993, 260: 1314-1317.
［31］Berbigier, P., Bonnefond, J. M., Mellmann, P., CO2 and water vapour fluxes for 2 years above Euroflux forest site, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2001, 108: 183-197.
［32］Barford, C. C., Wofsy, S. C., Goulden, M. L. et al., Factors controlling long- and short-term sequestration of atmospheric CO2 in a mid-latitude forest, Science, 2001, 294: 1688-1691.
［33］Law, B. E., Falge, E., Gu, L. et al., Environmental controls over carbon dioxide and water vapor exchange of terrestrial vegetation,Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2002, 113: 97-120.
［34］Chen, J. Q., Kyaw, T. P., Ustin, S. L. et al., Net ecosystem exchanges of carbon, water, and energy in young and old-growth Douglas-Fir forests, Ecosystems, 2004, 7: 534-544.
［35］Anthoni, P. M., Law, B. E., Unsworth, M. H., Carbon and water vapor exchange of an open-canopied ponderosa pine ecosystem,Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 1999, 95: 151-168.
［36］Keeling, R. F., Piper, S. C., Heimann M. Global and hemispheric CO2 sinks deduced from changes in atmospheric O2 concentration,Nature, 1996, 381: 218-221.
［37］Myneni, R. B., Keeling, C. D., Tucker, C. J. et al., Increased plant growth in the northern high latitudes from 1981 to 1991, Nature,1997, 386: 698-702.
［38］Ciais, P., Tans, P. P., Trolier, M., A large northern hemisphere terrestrial CO2 sink indicated by the 13C/12C ratio of atmospheric CO2, Science, 1995, 269: 1098-1102.
［39］Valentini, R., Matteucci, G., Dolman, A. J. et al., Respiration as the main determinant of carbon balance in European forests, Nature, 2000, 404: 861-864.
［40］Grace, J., Lloyd, J., McIntyre, J. et al., Carbon dioxide uptake by an undisturbed tropical rain forest in South-West Amazonia 1992-1993, Science, 1995, 270: 778-780.
［41］Malhi, Y., Nobre, A. D., Grace, J. et al., Carbon dioxide transfer over a central Amazonian rain forest, Journal of Geophysical Research, 1998, 103: 31593-31612.
［42］Carswell, F. E., Costa, A. L., Palheta, M. et al., Seasonality in CO2and H2O flux at an eastern Amazonian rain forest, Journal of Geophysical Research, 2002, 107(D20): 8076, doi: 10.1029/2000JD000284.
［43］Grace, J., Mahli, Y., Carbon dioxide goes with flow, Nature, 2002,416: 594-595.
［44］Saleska, S. R., Miller, S. D., Matross, D. M. et al., Carbon in Amazon Forests: Unexpected Seasonal Fluxes and Disturbance-Induced Losses, Science, 2003, 302:1554-1557.
［45］Wilson, K. B., Goldstein, A. H., Falge, E. et al., Energy balance closure at FLUXNET sites, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology,2002, 113: 223-243.
［46］Saigusa, N., Yamamoto, S., Murayama, S. et al., Gross primary production and net ecosystem exchange of a cool-temperate deciduous forest estimated by the eddy covariance method, Agricultural and Forestry, 2003, l 12:203-215.
［47］Tucker, C. J., Townshend, J. R. G., Goff, T. E., African land-cover classification using satellite data, Science, 1985, 227: 369-375.
［48］Schimel, D. S., Terrestrial biogeochemical cycle: global estimates with remote sensing. Remote Sensing of Environment, 1995, 51:
［49］-56.49.Field, C. B., Randerson, J. T., Malmstrom, C. M., Global net primary production: combining ecology and remote sensing, Remote Sensing of Environment, 1995, 51: 74-88.
［50］Houghton, R. A., The worldwide extent of land-use change, BioScience, 1994, 44:305～313.
［51］Hansen, M. C., DeFries, R. S., Townshend J. R.G. et al., Global land cover classification at lkm spatial resolution using a classification tree approach, International Journal of Remote Sensing,2000, 21: 1331-1364.
［52］DeFries, R. S., Field, C. B., Fung, I. et al., Mapping the land-surface for global atmosphere-biosphere models-toward continuous distributions of vegetations functional-properties,Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 1995, 100:20867-20882.
［53］Potter, C. S., Randerson, J. T., Field, C. B. et al., Terrestrial ecosystem production: a process model based on global satellite and surface data, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 1993, 7: 811-841.
［54］Ruimy, A., Saugier, B., Dedieu, G., Methodology for the estimation of net primary production from remotely sensed data, Journal of Geophysical Research, 1994, 99, 5263-5283.
［55］Prince, S. D., Goward, S. N., Global primary production: a remote sensing approach, Journal of Biogeography, 1995, 22: 815-835.
［56］Potter, C. S., Klooster, S. A., Brook, V., Interannual variability in terrestrial net primary production: exploration of triends and controls on regional to global scales, Ecosystems, 1999, 2: 36-48.
［57］Nemani, R. R., Keeling, C. D., Hashimoto, H. et al., Climate-driven increases in global terrestrial net primary production from 1982 to 1999, Science, 2003, 300: 1560-1563.
［58］Cao, M. K., Prince, S. D., Small, J. et al., Satellite remotely sensed interannual variability in terrestrial net primary productivity from 1980 to 2000, Ecosystems, 2004, 7: 233-242.
［59］Cao, M. K., Prince, S. D., Li, K. R. et al., Response of terrestrial carbon uptake to climate interannual variability in China, Global Change Biology, 2003, 9: 536-546.
［60］Tucker, C. J., Slayback, D. A., Prinzon, J. E. et al., Higher northern latitude normalized difference vegetation index and growing season trends from 1982 to 1999, International Journal of Biometeorology, 2001, 45:184- 190.
［61］Myneni, R. B., Dong, J., Tucker, C. J. et al., A large carbon sink in the woody biomass of Northern forests, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), 2001, 98: 14784-14789.
［62］Braswell, B. H., Schimel, D. S., Linder, E. et al., The response of global terrestrial ecosystems to interannual temperature variability,Science, 1997, 278, 870-872.
［63］Lucht, W., Prentice, I. C., Myneni, R. B., Climatic control of the high latitude vegetation greening trend and Pinatubo effect, Science, 2002, 296: 1687-1689.
［64］Houghton, R. A., Revised estimates of the annual net flux of carbon to the atmosphere from changes in land use and land management 1850-2000, Tellus B, 2003, 55:378-390.
［65］Achard, F., Eva, H. D., Stibig, H. P. et al., Determination of deforestation rates of the world's humid tropical forests, Science,2002, 297: 999-1002.
［66］DeFries, R. S., Houghton, R. A., Hansen, M. et al., Carbon emissions from tropical deforestation and regrowth based on satellite observations for the 1980s and 1990s, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), 2002, 99: 14256-14261.
［67］Houghton, R. A., Why are the estimates of the terrestrial carbon balance so different? Global Change Biology, 2003, 9: 500-509.
［68］Bousquet, P., Peylin, P., Ciais, P. et al., Regional changes of CO2fluxes over land and oceans since 1980, Science, 2000, 290:1342- 1346.
［69］Gurney, K. R., Law. R. M., Denning, A. S. et al., Towards robust regional estimates of CO2 sources and sinks using atmospheric transport models, Nature, 2002, 415: 626-630.
［70］Dubayah, R., Drake, J., Lidar Remote Sensing for Forestry, Journal of Forestry, 2000, 98: 44-46.
［71］Francey, R. J., Tans, P. P., Allison, C. E., Changes in oceanic and terrestrial carbon uptake since 1982, Nature, 1995, 373:326-330.
［72］Rayner, P. J., Enting, I. G., Francey, R. J. et al., Reconstructing the recent carbon cycle from atmospheric CO2, δ13C and O2/N2observations, Tellus, 1999, 5lB, 213-232.
［73］Heimann, M., Atmospheric inversion calculations performed for IPCC third assessment report chapter 3 (The carbon cycle and atmospheric CO2), Technical Reports-Max-Planck-Institute fur Biogeochemie No. 2, Max-Planck-Institute fur Biogeochemie,Jena, 2001.
［74］Malhi, Y., Grace, J., Tropical forests and atmospheric carbon dioxide, Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 2000, 15: 332-337.
［75］Pataki, D. E., Ehleringer, Flanagan, L. B. et al., The application and interpretation of keeling plots in terrestrial carbon cycle research, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2003, 1022 doi:10.1029/2001GB001850.
［76］Janssens, I. A., Freibauer, A., Ciais, P. et al., Europe's terrestrial biosphere absorbs 7 to 12% of european anthropogenic CO2 emissions, Science, 2003, 300: 1538-1542.
［77］Friedlingstein, P., Bopp, L., Ciais, P. et al., Positive feedback between future climate change and the carbon cycle, Geophysical Research Letter, 2001, 28: 1543-1546.
［78］Caspersen, J. P., Pacala, S. W., Jenkins, J. C. et al., Contributions of land-use history to carbon accumulation in U.S. forests, Science, 2000, 290: 1148-1151.
［79］Cao, M. K., Prince, S. D., Shugart, H. H., Increasing terrestrial carbon uptake from the 1980s to the 1990s with changes in climate and atmospheric CO2, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2002,16,1069, doi: 10.1029/2001GB001553.
［80］Goward, S. N., Prince, S. D., Transient effects of climate on vegetation dynamics: Satellite observations, Journal of Biogeography, 1995, 22: 549-564.
［81］Nemani, R., White, M., Thornton, P. et al., Recent trends in hydrologic balance have enhanced the terrestrial carbon sink in the United States, Geophysical Research Letters, 2002, 29:10.1029/2002GL014867.
［82］Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W. et al., Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production, Nature,1993, 363: 234-240.
［83］Cao, M. K., Woodward, F. I., Dynamic responses of terrestrial ecosystem carbon cycling to global climate change, Nature, 1998a,393: 249-252.
［84］DeFries, R. S., Field, C. B., Fung I. et al., Combining satellite data and biogeochemical models to estimate global effects of human-induced land cover change on carbon emissions and primary productivity, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 1999, 13:803-815.
［85］Cramer, W., Bondeau, A., Woodward, F. I. et al., Global responses of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to CO2 and climate change: results from six dynamic global vegetation models,Global Change Biology, 2001, 7: 357-373.
［86］Cox, P. M., Betts, R. A., Jones, C. D. et al., Acceleration of global warming due to carbon cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model, Nature, 2000, 408:184- 187.
［87］Rastetter, E. B., Shaver, G. R., A model of multiple-element limitation for acclimating vegetation, Ecology, 1992, 73:1157- 1174.
［88］Chapin, F. S., Integrated responses of plants to stress, Bioscience,1991, 41: 29-36.
［89］Field, C. B., Chapin, F. S., Matson, P. A. et al., Responses of terrestrial ecosystems to the changing atmosphere-a resource-based approach, Ann. Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1992, 23:201 -235.
［90］Iwasa, Y., Roughgarden, J., Shoot/root balance of plants: optimal growth of asystem with many vegetative organs, Theoretical Population Biology, 1984, 25: 78-105.
［91］Hilbert, D. W., Optimization of plant root:shoot ratios and internal nitrogen concentrations, Annals of Botany, 1990, 66:91-99.
［92］Bernacchi, C. J., Coleman, J. S., Bazzaz, F. A. et al., Biomass allocation in old-field annual species grown in elevated CO2 environments: no evidence for optimal partitioning, Global Change Biology, 2000, 6:855-867.
［93］Curtis, P. S., Wang, X., A meta-analysis of elevated CO2 effects on woody plant mass, form, and physiology, Oecologia, 1998, 113:299-313.
［94］Heimann, M., Kaminski, T., Inverse modeling approaches to infer surface trace gas fluxes from observed atmospheric mixing ratios,in Approaches to scaling of trace gas fluxes in ecosystems (ed.Bouwman, A. F.), Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1999,14: 275-295.
［95］Luo, Y., White, L., Canadell, J. et al., Sustainability of terrestrial carbon sequestration: A case study in Duke Forest with inversion approach, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2003, 17(1): 1021,doi: 10.1029/2002GB001923.
［96］Rayner, P. J., Scholze, M., Knorr, W. et al., Two decades of terrestrial Carbon fluxes from a Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS), Global Biogeochemical Cycle, 2004, in press.
［97］Barrett, D. J., Xu, H. Y., Parameterization of a large-scale terrestrial carbon cycle model by a constrained genetic algorithm using multiple datasets of ecological observations from minimally disturbed sites, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2004, in press.
［98］White, L., Luo, Y., Inverse analysis for estimating carbon transfer coefficients in Duke Forest, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 2002, 130: 101-120.

Manuscript Received：2004年7月14日

Manuscript Revised：2005年1月19日

Published：2005年4月1日