4.5 Article

Estimation of carbon sequestration by combining remote sensing and net ecosystem exchange data for northern mixed-grass prairie and sagebrush-steppe ecosystems

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Volume 33, Issue -, Pages S432-S441

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-003-9151-0

Keywords

net ecosystem exchange; NDVI; absorbed photosynthetically active radiation; radiation use efficiency; sagebrush-steppe; northern mixed-grass prairie

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Carbon sequestration was estimated a northern mixed-grass prairie site and a sagebrush-steppe site in southeastern Wyoming using an approach that integrates remote sensing, CO2 flux measurements, and meteorological data. Net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of CO2 was measured using aircraft and ground flux techniques and was linearly related to absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (APAR). The slope of this relationship is the radiation use efficiency (epsilon = 0.51 g C/MJ APAR); there were no significant differences in the regression coefficients between the two sites. Furthermore, ecosystem chamber measurements of total respiration in 1998 and 1999 were used to develop a functional relationship with daily average temperature; the Q(10) of the relationship was 2.2. Using the Advanced Very High Resolution radiometer. Normalized Difference Vegetation Index and meteorological data, annual gross primary production and respiration were calculated from 1995 to 1999 for the two sites. Overall, the sagebrush-steppe site was a net carbon sink, whereas the northern mixed-grass prairie site was in carbon balance. There was no significant relationship between NEE and APAR for a coniferous forest site, indicating this method for scaling up CO2 flux data may be only applicable to range-land ecosystems. The combination of remote sensing with data from CO2 flux networks can be used to estimate carbon sequestration regionally in range-land ecosystems.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available