Search

The atmospheric boundary layer mediates the exchange of energy, matter, and momentum between the land surface and the free troposphere, integrating a range of physical, chemical, and biological processes and is defined as the lowest layer of the atmosphere (ranging from a few meters to 3 km). In this review, we investigate how continuous, automated observations of the atmospheric boundary layer can enhance the scientific value of co-located eddy covariance measurements of land-atmosphere fluxes of carbon, water, and energy, as are being made at FLUXNET sites worldwide. We highlight four key opportunities to integrate tower-based flux measurements with continuous, long-term atmospheric boundary layer measurements: (1) to interpret surface flux and atmospheric boundary layer exchange dynamics and feedbacks at flux tower sites, (2) to support flux footprint modelling, the interpretation of surface fluxes in heterogeneous and mountainous terrain, and quality control of eddy covariance flux measurements, (3) to support regional-scale modeling and upscaling of surface fluxes to continental scales, and (4) to quantify land-atmosphere coupling and validate its representation in Earth system models. Adding a suite of atmospheric boundary layer measurements to eddy covariance flux tower sites, and supporting the sharing of these data to tower networks, would allow the Earth science community to address new emerging research questions, better interpret ongoing flux tower measurements, and would present novel opportunities for collaborations between FLUXNET scientists and atmospheric and remote sensing scientists.

Large datasets of greenhouse gas and energy surface-atmosphere fluxes measured with the eddy-covariance technique (e.g., FLUXNET2015, AmeriFlux BASE) are widely used to benchmark models and remote-sensing products. This study addresses one of the major challenges facing model-data integration: To what spatial extent do flux measurements taken at individual eddy-covariance sites reflect model- or satellite-based grid cells? We evaluate flux footprints—the temporally dynamic source areas that contribute to measured fluxes—and the representativeness of these footprints for target areas (e.g., within 250–3000 m radii around flux towers) that are often used in flux-data synthesis and modeling studies. We examine the land-cover composition and vegetation characteristics, represented here by the Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI), in the flux footprints and target areas across 214 AmeriFlux sites, and evaluate potential biases as a consequence of the footprint-to-target-area mismatch. Monthly 80% footprint climatologies vary across sites and through time ranging four orders of magnitude from 103 to 107 m2 due to the measurement heights, underlying vegetation- and ground-surface characteristics, wind directions, and turbulent state of the atmosphere. Few eddy-covariance sites are located in a truly homogeneous landscape. Thus, the common model-data integration approaches that use a fixed-extent target area across sites introduce biases on the order of 4%–20% for EVI and 6%–20% for the dominant land cover percentage. These biases are site-specific functions of measurement heights, target area extents, and land-surface characteristics. We advocate that flux datasets need to be used with footprint awareness, especially in research and applications that benchmark against models and data products with explicit spatial information. We propose a simple representativeness index based on our evaluations that can be used as a guide to identify site-periods suitable for specific applications and to provide general guidance for data use.

Land-use/cover change (LUCC) is an important driver of environmental change, occurring at the same time as, and often interacting with, global climate change. Reforestation and deforestation have been critical aspects of LUCC over the past two centuries and are widely studied for their potential to perturb the global carbon cycle. More recently, there has been keen interest in understanding the extent to which reforestation affects terrestrial energy cycling and thus surface temperature directly by altering surface physical properties (e.g., albedo and emissivity) and land-atmosphere energy exchange. The impacts of reforestation on land surface temperature and their mechanisms are relatively well understood in tropical and boreal climates, but the effects of reforestation on warming and/or cooling in temperate zones are less certain. This study is designed to elucidate the biophysical mechanisms that link land cover and surface temperature in temperate ecosystems. To achieve this goal, we used data from six paired eddy-covariance towers over co-located forests and grasslands in the temperate eastern United States, where radiation components, latent and sensible heat fluxes, and meteorological conditions were measured. The results show that, at the annual time scale, the surface of the forests is 1-2°C cooler than grasslands, indicating a substantial cooling effect of reforestation. The enhanced latent and sensible heat fluxes of forests have an average cooling effect of -2.5°C, which offsets the net warming effect (+1.5°C) of albedo warming (+2.3°C) and emissivity cooling effect (-0.8°C) associated with surface properties. Additional daytime cooling over forests is driven by local feedbacks to incoming radiation. We further show that the forest cooling effect is most pronounced when land surface temperature is higher, often exceeding -5°C. Our results contribute important observational evidence that reforestation in the temperate zone offers opportunities for local climate mitigation and adaptation.

Aim: Terrestrial ecosystems have sequestered, on average, the equivalent of 30% of anthropogenic carbon (C) emissions during the past decades, but annual sequestration varies from year to year. For effective C management, it is imperative to develop a predictive understanding of the interannual variability (IAV) of terrestrial net ecosystem C exchange (NEE). Location: Global terrestrial ecosystems. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive review to examine the IAV of NEE at global, regional and ecosystem scales. Then we outlined a conceptual framework for understanding how anomalies in climate factors impact ecological processes of C cycling and thus influence the IAV of NEE through biogeochemical regulation. Results: The phenomenon of IAV in land NEE has been ubiquitously observed at global, regional and ecosystem scales. Global IAV is often attributable to either tropical or semi-arid regions, or to some combination thereof, which is still under debate. Previous studies focus on identifying climate factors as driving forces of IAV, whereas biological mechanisms underlying the IAV of ecosystem NEE are less clear. We found that climate anomalies affect the IAV of NEE primarily through their differential impacts on ecosystem C uptake and respiration. Moreover, recent studies suggest that the carbon uptake period makes less contribution than the carbon uptake amplitude to IAV in NEE. Although land models incorporate most processes underlying IAV, their efficacy to predict the IAV in NEE remains low. Main conclusions: To improve our ability to predict future IAV of the terrestrial C cycle, we have to understand biological mechanisms through which anomalies in climate factors cause the IAV of NEE. Future research needs to pay more attention not only to the differential effects of climate anomalies on photosynthesis and respiration but also to the relative importance of the C uptake period and amplitude in causing the IAV of NEE. Ultimately, we need multiple independent approaches, such as benchmark analysis, data assimilation and time-series statistics, to integrate data, modelling frameworks and theory to improve our ability to predict future IAV in the terrestrial C cycle.

We investigated the spatiotemporal variability of remotely sensed gross primary productivity (GPP) over Türkiye based on MODIS, TL-LUE, GOSIF, MuSyQ, and PMLV2 GPP products. The differences in various GPP products were assessed using Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U methods, and long-term trends were analyzed using Modified Mann–Kendall (MMK), innovative trend analysis (ITA), and empirical mode decomposition (EMD). Our results show that at least one GPP product significantly differs from the others over the seven geographic regions of Türkiye (χ2 values of 50.8, 21.9, 76.9, 42.6, 149, 34.5, and 168; p < 0.05), and trend analyses reveal a significant increase in GPP from all satellite-based products over the latter half of the study period. Throughout the year, the average number of months in which each dataset showed significant increases across all study regions are 6.7, 8.1, 5.9, 9.6, and 8.7 for MODIS, TL-LUE, GOSIF, MuSyQ, and PMLV2, respectively. The ITA and EMD methods provided additional insight into the MMK test in both visualizing and detecting trends due to their graphical techniques. Overall, the GPP products investigated here suggest 'greening' for Türkiye, consistent with the findings from global studies, but the use of different statistical approaches and satellite-based GPP estimates creates different interpretations of how these trends have emerged. Ground stations, such as eddy covariance towers, can help further improve our understanding of the carbon cycle across the diverse ecosystem of Türkiye. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The quantitative simulation of gross primary production (GPP) at various spatial and temporal scales has been a major challenge in quantifying the global carbon cycle. We developed a light use efficiency (LUE) daily GPP model from eddy covariance (EC) measurements. The model, called EC-LUE, is driven by only four variables: normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), air temperature, and the Bowen ratio of sensible to latent heat flux (used to calculate moisture stress). The EC-LUE model relies on two assumptions: First, that the fraction of absorbed PAR (fPAR) is a linear function of NDVI; Second, that the realized light use efficiency, calculated from a biome-independent invariant potential LUE, is controlled by air temperature or soil moisture, whichever is most limiting. The EC-LUE model was calibrated and validated using 24,349 daily GPP estimates derived from 28 eddy covariance flux towers from the AmeriFlux and EuroFlux networks, covering a variety of forests, grasslands and savannas. The model explained 85% and 77% of the observed variations of daily GPP for all the calibration and validation sites, respectively. A comparison with GPP calculated from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) indicated that the EC-LUE model predicted GPP that better matched tower data across these sites. The realized LUE was predominantly controlled by moisture conditions throughout the growing season, and controlled by temperature only at the beginning and end of the growing season. The EC-LUE model is an alternative approach that makes it possible to map daily GPP over large areas because (1) the potential LUE is invariant across various land cover types and (2) all driving forces of the model can be derived from remote sensing data or existing climate observation networks.

Climate change is intensifying the hydrologic cycle and altering ecosystem function, including water flux to the atmosphere through evapotranspiration (ET). ET is made up of evaporation (E) via non‐stomatal surfaces, and transpiration (T) through plant stomata which are impacted by global changes in different ways. E and T are difficult to measure independently at the ecosystem scale, especially across multiple sites that represent different land use and land management strategies. To address this gap in understanding, we applied flux variance similarity (FVS) to quantify how E and T differ across 13 different ecosystems measured using eddy covariance in a 10 × 10 km area from the CHEESEHEAD19 experiment in northern Wisconsin, USA. The study sites included eight forests with a large deciduous broadleaf component, three evergreen needleleaf forests, and two wetlands. Average T/ET for the study period averaged nearly 52% in forested sites and 45% in wetlands, with larger values after excluding periods following rain events when evaporation from canopy interception may be expected. A dominance analysis revealed that environmental variables explained on average 69% of the variance of half‐hourly T, which decreased from summer to autumn. Deciduous and evergreen forests showed similar E trajectories over time despite differences in vegetation phenology, and vapor pressure deficit explained some 13% of the variance E in wetlands but only 5% or less in forests. Retrieval of E and T within a dense network of flux towers lends confidence that FVS is a promising approach for comparing ecosystem hydrology across multiple sites to improve our process‐based understanding of ecosystem water fluxes. Key Points: Eddy covariance‐measured evapotranspiration was partitioned to transpiration and evaporation using flux variance similarity at 14 ecosystemsNet radiation explained most of the variability in transpiration, which was lowest in wetland ecosystems and vapor pressure deficit explained more of the variability of evaporation in wetlands than forestsDaily evaporation varied little over time and amongst sites from summer to autumn [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]