{"title":"Global Terrestrial Water–Energy Coupling Across Scales","authors":"Deanroy Mbabazi, Vinit Sehgal, Binayak P. Mohanty","doi":"10.1002/eco.2743","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Terrestrial water–energy coupling (WEC), in the form of a non-linear relationship between Soil Moisture (SM) and evaporative fraction (EF, ratio of actual and potential evapotranspiration), controls critical ecohydrological processes. We investigate and parameterize the evolution of global SM–EF coupling from the field to remote-sensing (RS)-pixel. The field-scale EF and SM were obtained from eddy covariance (EC) and SM sensors at the global FLUXNET and Texas Water Observatory sites. RS-pixel-scale EF and SM estimates were obtained from Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) and Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) sensors, respectively. We estimate the <i>effective</i> thresholds of the WEC regimes from both EC and satellite datasets to highlight the influence of sub-pixel-scale heterogeneity, and, scaling and observational constraints on the evolution of WEC regimes from the field to RS-pixel scale. We argue that the changes in land surface conditions add a temporal variability in the critical thresholds of terrestrial WEC at RS pixel scale. We compare the critical WEC thresholds of the water- and energy-limited regimes with a SM drydown-based approach and highlight the similarities between both methods in partitioning dominant WEC regimes. EF and SM are strongly coupled in dryland arid and semi-arid regions compared to humid climates. WEC regimes and thresholds have strong interseason variability due to dynamic interactions between soil, vegetation and atmosphere at the RS-pixel scale. In contrast, field-scale SM-EF coupling is influenced predominantly by soil conditions and land-use/management practices. Hence, future development of Earth-system/Land-surface models must account for the inter-scale differences in the coupling between terrestrial water and energy fluxes representative of the ‘<i>effective</i>’ processes at large spatial scales.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55169,"journal":{"name":"Ecohydrology","volume":"18 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eco.2743","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecohydrology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eco.2743","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Terrestrial water–energy coupling (WEC), in the form of a non-linear relationship between Soil Moisture (SM) and evaporative fraction (EF, ratio of actual and potential evapotranspiration), controls critical ecohydrological processes. We investigate and parameterize the evolution of global SM–EF coupling from the field to remote-sensing (RS)-pixel. The field-scale EF and SM were obtained from eddy covariance (EC) and SM sensors at the global FLUXNET and Texas Water Observatory sites. RS-pixel-scale EF and SM estimates were obtained from Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) and Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) sensors, respectively. We estimate the effective thresholds of the WEC regimes from both EC and satellite datasets to highlight the influence of sub-pixel-scale heterogeneity, and, scaling and observational constraints on the evolution of WEC regimes from the field to RS-pixel scale. We argue that the changes in land surface conditions add a temporal variability in the critical thresholds of terrestrial WEC at RS pixel scale. We compare the critical WEC thresholds of the water- and energy-limited regimes with a SM drydown-based approach and highlight the similarities between both methods in partitioning dominant WEC regimes. EF and SM are strongly coupled in dryland arid and semi-arid regions compared to humid climates. WEC regimes and thresholds have strong interseason variability due to dynamic interactions between soil, vegetation and atmosphere at the RS-pixel scale. In contrast, field-scale SM-EF coupling is influenced predominantly by soil conditions and land-use/management practices. Hence, future development of Earth-system/Land-surface models must account for the inter-scale differences in the coupling between terrestrial water and energy fluxes representative of the ‘effective’ processes at large spatial scales.
陆地水能耦合(WEC)以土壤湿度(SM)与蒸发分数(EF,实际蒸散与潜在蒸散之比)的非线性关系的形式,控制着关键的生态水文过程。我们研究并参数化了从野外到遥感(RS)像元的全球SM-EF耦合的演变。场尺度的EF和SM分别由全球FLUXNET和Texas Water Observatory站点的涡动相关(EC)和SM传感器获得。rs像素尺度的EF和SM分别由中分辨率成像光谱仪(MODIS)和土壤水分主动被动传感器(SMAP)估算。我们从EC和卫星数据集估计了WEC制度的有效阈值,以突出亚像元尺度异质性的影响,以及尺度和观测约束对WEC制度从野外到rs像元尺度演变的影响。我们认为,地表条件的变化增加了RS像元尺度下陆地WEC临界阈值的时间变异性。我们比较了水和能量限制机制的临界WEC阈值与基于SM干燥的方法,并强调了两种方法在划分主导WEC机制方面的相似性。相对于湿润气候,EF和SM在干旱、干旱和半干旱地区具有很强的耦合性。在rs像元尺度下,由于土壤、植被和大气之间的动态相互作用,WEC状态和阈值具有较强的季间变异性。相比之下,田间尺度的土壤土壤-土壤土壤耦合主要受土壤条件和土地利用/管理实践的影响。因此,地球系统/陆地表面模式的未来发展必须考虑到代表大空间尺度上“有效”过程的陆地水和能量通量之间耦合的尺度间差异。
期刊介绍:
Ecohydrology is an international journal publishing original scientific and review papers that aim to improve understanding of processes at the interface between ecology and hydrology and associated applications related to environmental management.
Ecohydrology seeks to increase interdisciplinary insights by placing particular emphasis on interactions and associated feedbacks in both space and time between ecological systems and the hydrological cycle. Research contributions are solicited from disciplines focusing on the physical, ecological, biological, biogeochemical, geomorphological, drainage basin, mathematical and methodological aspects of ecohydrology. Research in both terrestrial and aquatic systems is of interest provided it explicitly links ecological systems and the hydrologic cycle; research such as aquatic ecological, channel engineering, or ecological or hydrological modelling is less appropriate for the journal unless it specifically addresses the criteria above. Manuscripts describing individual case studies are of interest in cases where broader insights are discussed beyond site- and species-specific results.