4.3 Article

Evaluation and improvements of two community models in simulating dry deposition velocities for peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN) over a coniferous forest

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2011JD016751

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [40875076, U0833001]
  2. National Program on Key Basic Research Project of China (973) [2010CB428504]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
  4. National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
  5. NCAR BEACHON
  6. NCAR Water System Program
  7. U.S. NSF DRInet
  8. National Science Foundation (NSF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dry deposition velocities (V-d) for peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN) calculated using two community dry deposition models with different treatments of both stomatal and nonstomatal uptakes were evaluated using measurements of PAN eddy covariance fluxes over a Loblolly pine forest in July 2003. The observed daytime maximum of V-d(PAN) was similar to 1.0 cm s(-1) on average, while the estimates by the WRF-Chem dry deposition module (WDDM) and the Noah land surface model coupled with a photosynthesis-based Gas Exchange Model (Noah-GEM) were only 0.2 cm s(-1) and 0.6 cm s(-1), respectively. The observations also showed considerable PAN deposition at night with typical V-d values of 0.2-0.6 cm s(-1), while the estimated values from both models were less than 0.1 cm s(-1). Noah-GEM modeled more realistic stomatal resistance (R-s) than WDDM, as compared with observations of water vapor exchange fluxes. The poor performance of WDDM for stomatal uptake is mainly due to its lack of dependence on leaf area index. Thermal decomposition was found to be relatively unimportant for measured PAN fluxes as shown by the lack of a relationship between measured total surface conductance and temperature. Thus, a large part of the underprediction in V-d from both models should be caused by the underestimation of nonstomatal uptake, in particular, the cuticle uptake. Sensitivity tests on both stomatal and nonstomatal resistances terms were conducted and some recommendations were provided.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据