Comparison of Global Aboveground Biomass Estimates From Satellite Observations and Dynamic Global Vegetation Models

IF 3.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Bassil El Masri, Jingfeng Xiao
{"title":"Comparison of Global Aboveground Biomass Estimates From Satellite Observations and Dynamic Global Vegetation Models","authors":"Bassil El Masri,&nbsp;Jingfeng Xiao","doi":"10.1029/2024JG008305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The global forest carbon stocks represent the amount of carbon stored in woody vegetation and are important for quantifying the ability of the global forests to sequester atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> and to provide ecosystem services (e.g., timber) under climate change. The forest ecosystem carbon pool estimates are highly variable and poorly quantified in areas lacking forest inventory estimates. Here, we compare and analyze aboveground biomass (AGB) estimates from five satellite-based global data sets and nine dynamic global vegetation models (DVGMs). We find that across the data sets, mean AGB exhibits the largest variability around the tropical area. In addition, AGB shows a similar latitudinal trend but large variability among the data sets. Satellite-based AGB estimates are lower than those simulated by DVGMs. The divergence among the satellite-based AGB estimates can be driven by the methodology, input satellite products, and the forested areas used to estimate AGB. The modeled NPP, autotrophic respiration, and carbon allocation mostly drive the variability of AGB simulated by DGVMs. The future availability of a high-quality global forest area map is anticipated to improve AGB estimate accuracy and to reduce the discrepancies among different satellite- and model-based AGB estimates. We suggest the carbon-modeling community reexamine the methodology used to estimate AGB and forested areas for a more robust global forest carbon stock estimation.</p>","PeriodicalId":16003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences","volume":"130 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024JG008305","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The global forest carbon stocks represent the amount of carbon stored in woody vegetation and are important for quantifying the ability of the global forests to sequester atmospheric CO2 and to provide ecosystem services (e.g., timber) under climate change. The forest ecosystem carbon pool estimates are highly variable and poorly quantified in areas lacking forest inventory estimates. Here, we compare and analyze aboveground biomass (AGB) estimates from five satellite-based global data sets and nine dynamic global vegetation models (DVGMs). We find that across the data sets, mean AGB exhibits the largest variability around the tropical area. In addition, AGB shows a similar latitudinal trend but large variability among the data sets. Satellite-based AGB estimates are lower than those simulated by DVGMs. The divergence among the satellite-based AGB estimates can be driven by the methodology, input satellite products, and the forested areas used to estimate AGB. The modeled NPP, autotrophic respiration, and carbon allocation mostly drive the variability of AGB simulated by DGVMs. The future availability of a high-quality global forest area map is anticipated to improve AGB estimate accuracy and to reduce the discrepancies among different satellite- and model-based AGB estimates. We suggest the carbon-modeling community reexamine the methodology used to estimate AGB and forested areas for a more robust global forest carbon stock estimation.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences
Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences Earth and Planetary Sciences-Paleontology
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
5.40%
发文量
242
期刊介绍: JGR-Biogeosciences focuses on biogeosciences of the Earth system in the past, present, and future and the extension of this research to planetary studies. The emerging field of biogeosciences spans the intellectual interface between biology and the geosciences and attempts to understand the functions of the Earth system across multiple spatial and temporal scales. Studies in biogeosciences may use multiple lines of evidence drawn from diverse fields to gain a holistic understanding of terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems and extreme environments. Specific topics within the scope of the section include process-based theoretical, experimental, and field studies of biogeochemistry, biogeophysics, atmosphere-, land-, and ocean-ecosystem interactions, biomineralization, life in extreme environments, astrobiology, microbial processes, geomicrobiology, and evolutionary geobiology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信