Remote sensing‐based estimation of annual soil respiration at two contrasting forest sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Soil respiration (Rs), an important component of the global carbon cycle, can be estimated using remotely sensed data, but the accuracy of this technique has not been thoroughly investigated. In this study, we proposed a methodology for the remote estimation of annual Rs at two contrasting FLUXNET forest sites (a deciduous broadleaf forest and an evergreen needleleaf forest). A version of the Akaike's information criterion was used to select the best model from a range of models for annual Rs estimation based on the remotely sensed data products from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer and root‐zone soil moisture product derived from assimilation of the NASA Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer soil moisture products and a two‐layer Palmer water balance model. We found that the Arrhenius‐type function based on nighttime land surface temperature (LST‐night) was the best model by comprehensively considering the model explanatory power and model complexity at the Missouri Ozark and BC‐Campbell River 1949 Douglas‐fir sites. In addition, a multicollinearity problem among LST‐night, root‐zone soil moisture, and plant photosynthesis factor was effectively avoided by selecting the LST‐night‐driven model. Cross validation showed that temporal variation in Rs was captured by the LST‐night‐driven model with a mean absolute error below 1 µmol CO2 m−2 s−1 at both forest sites. An obvious overestimation that occurred in 2005 and 2007 at the Missouri Ozark site reduced the evaluation accuracy of cross validation because of summer drought. However, no significant difference was found between the Arrhenius‐type function driven by LST‐night and the function considering LST‐night and root‐zone soil moisture. This finding indicated that the contribution of soil moisture to Rs was relatively small at our multiyear data set. To predict intersite Rs, maximum leaf area index (LAImax) was used as an upscaling factor to calibrate the site‐specific reference respiration rates. Independent validation demonstrated that the model incorporating LST‐night and LAImax efficiently predicted the spatial and temporal variabilities of Rs. Based on the Arrhenius‐type function using LST‐night as an input parameter, the rates of annual C release from Rs were 894–1027 g C m−2 yr−1 at the BC‐Campbell River 1949 Douglas‐fir site and 818–943 g C m−2 yr−1 at the Missouri Ozark site. The ratio between annual Rs estimates based on remotely sensed data and the total annual ecosystem respiration from eddy covariance measurements fell within the range reported in previous studies. Our results demonstrated that estimating annual Rs based on remote sensing data products was possible at deciduous and evergreen forest sites.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".