期刊论文

Yuan, Wenping

英文

Agricultural and Forest Meteorology

0168-1923

2014

192

108-120

10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.03.007

This study was supported by the National Science Foundation for Excellent Young Scholars of China (41322005), the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) (2013AA122003, 2013AA122800), Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University (NCET-12-0060), LCLUC Program of NASA, Innovation Teams Program of Hunan Natural Science Foundation of China (2013 #7), and IceMe of the NUIST. This work used eddy covariance data acquired by the FLUXNET community and in particular by the following networks: AmeriFlux (U.S. Department of Energy, Biological and Environmental Research, Terrestrial Carbon Program (DE-FG02-04ER63917 and DE-FG02-04ER63911)), AfriFlux, AsiaFlux, CarboAfrica, CarboEuropeIP, CarboItaly, CarboMont, ChinaFlux, Fluxnet-Canada (supported by CFCAS, NSERC, BIOCAP, Environment Canada, and NRCan), GreenGrass, KoFlux, LBA, NECC, OzFlux, TCOS-Siberia, and the USCCC. We acknowledge the financial support to the eddy covariance data harmonization provided by GHG-Europe, FAO-GTOS-TCO, iLEAPS, Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, National Science Foundation, University of Tuscia, Université Laval, Environment Canada and US Department of Energy and the database development and technical support from Berkeley Water Center, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Microsoft Research eScience, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, University of California – Berkeley and the University of Virginia.

本校为其他机构

Simulating gross primary productivity (GPP) of terrestrial ecosystems has been a major challenge in quantifying the global carbon cycle. Many different light use efficiency (LUE) models have been developed recently, but our understanding of the relative merits of different models remains limited. Using CO2 flux measurements from multiple eddy covariance sites, we here compared and assessed major algorithms and performance of seven LUE models (CASA, CFix, CFlux, EC-LUE, MODIS, VPM and VPRM). Comparison between simulated GPP and estimated GPP fro...