4.7 Article

Net primary productivity of China's terrestrial ecosystems from a process model driven by remote sensing

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Volume 85, Issue 3, Pages 563-573

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.09.021

Keywords

BEPS; net primary productivity (NPP); leaf area index (LAI); land cover; soil available water capacity (AWC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The terrestrial carbon cycle is one of the foci in global climate change research. Simulating net primary productivity (NPP) of terrestrial ecosystems is important for carbon cycle research. In this study, China's terrestrial NPP was simulated using the Boreal Ecosystem Productivity Simulator (BEPS), a carbon-water coupled process model based on remote sensing inputs. For these purposes, a national-wide database (including leaf area index, land cover, meteorology, vegetation and soil) at a I km resolution and a validation database were established. Using these databases and BEPS, daily maps of NPP for the entire China's landmass in 2001 were produced, and gross primary productivity (GPP) and autotrophic respiration (RA) were estimated. Using the simulated results, we explore temporal-spatial patterns of China's terrestrial NPP and the mechanisms of its responses to various environmental factors. The total NPP and mean NPP of China's landmass were 2.235GtC and 235.2gCm(-2) yr(-1), respectively; the total GPP and mean GPP were 4.418 GtC and 465 gCm m(-2) yr(-1) 1; and the total RA and mean RA were 2.227 GtC and 234 gC m-2 yr-1, respectively. On average, NPP was 50.6% of GPP. In addition, statistical analysis of NPP of different land cover types was conducted, and spatiotemporal patterns of NPP were investigated. The response of NPP to changes in some key factors such as LAI, precipitation, temperature, solar radiation, VPD and AWC are evaluated and discussed. (C) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available