Browsing by Author "Dietze, Michael C."

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4

Assessing interactions among changing climate, management, and disturbance in forests: a macrosystems approach
(2015-03) Becknell, Justin M.; Desai, Ankur R.; Dietze, Michael C.; Schultz, Courtney A.; Starr, Gregory; Stoy, Paul C.; Duffy, Paul A.; Franklin, Jerry F.; Pourmokhtarian, Afshin; Hall, Jaclyn; Binford, Michael W.; Boring, Lindsay R.; Staudhammer, Christina L.
Forests are experiencing simultaneous changes in climate, disturbance regimes, and management, all of which affect ecosystem function. Climate change is shifting ranges and altering forest productivity. Disturbance regimes are changing with the potential for novel interactions among disturbance types. In some areas, forest management practices are intensifying, whereas in other areas, lower-impact ecological methods are being used. Interactions among these changing factors are likely to alter ecosystem structure and function at regional to continental scales. A macrosystems approach is essential to assessing the broadscale impacts of these changes and quantify cross-scale interactions, emergent patterns, and feedbacks. A promising line of analysis is the assimilation of data with ecosystem models to scale processes to the macrosystem and generate projections based on alternative scenarios. Analyses of these projections can characterize the range of future variability in forest function and provide information to guide policy, industry, and science in a changing world.
Characterizing the performance of ecosystem models across time scales: A spectral analysis of the North American Carbon Program site‐level synthesis
(2011-12-20) Dietze, Michael C.; Vargas, Rodrigo; Richardson, Andrew D.; Stoy, Paul C.; Barr, Alan G.; Anderson, Ryan S.; M. Altaf Arain, M. Altaf; Baker, Ian T.; Blac, T. Andrew; Chen, Jing M.; Ciais, Philippe; Flanagan, Lawrence B.; Gough, Christopher M.; Grant, Robert F.; Hollinger, David Y.; Izaurralde, R. Cesar; Kucharik, Christopher J.; Lafleur, Peter; Liu, Shuguang; Lokupitiya, Erandathie; Luo, Yiqi; Munger, J. William; Peng, Changhui; Poulter, Benjamin; Price, David T.; Ricciuto, Daniel M.; Riley, William J.; Sahoo, Alok Kumar; Schaefer, Kevin; Suyker, Andrew E.; Tain, Hanqin; Tonitto, Christina; Verbeeck, Hans; Verma, Shashi B.; Weifeng, Wang; Weng, Ensheng
Ecosystem models are important tools for diagnosing the carbon cycle and projecting its behavior across space and time. Despite the fact that ecosystems respond to drivers at multiple time scales, most assessments of model performance do not discriminate different time scales. Spectral methods, such as wavelet analyses, present an alternative approach that enables the identification of the dominant time scales contributing to model performance in the frequency domain. In this study we used wavelet analyses to synthesize the performance of 21 ecosystem models at 9 eddy covariance towers as part of the North American Carbon Program's site-level intercomparison. This study expands upon previous single-site and single-model analyses to determine what patterns of model error are consistent across a diverse range of models and sites. To assess the significance of model error at different time scales, a novel Monte Carlo approach was developed to incorporate flux observation error. Failing to account for observation error leads to a misidentification of the time scales that dominate model error. These analyses show that model error (1) is largest at the annual and 20–120 day scales, (2) has a clear peak at the diurnal scale, and (3) shows large variability among models in the 2–20 day scales. Errors at the annual scale were consistent across time, diurnal errors were predominantly during the growing season, and intermediate-scale errors were largely event driven. Breaking spectra into discrete temporal bands revealed a significant model-by-band effect but also a nonsignificant model-by-site effect, which together suggest that individual models show consistency in their error patterns. Differences among models were related to model time step, soil hydrology, and the representation of photosynthesis and phenology but not the soil carbon or nitrogen cycles. These factors had the greatest impact on diurnal errors, were less important at annual scales, and had the least impact at intermediate time scales.
Evaluating the agreement between measurements and models of net ecosystem exchange at different times and time scales using wavelet coherence: an example using data from the North American Carbon Program Site-Level Interim Synthesis
(2013-11) Stoy, Paul C.; Dietze, Michael C.; Richardson, Andrew D.; Vargas, Rodrigo; Barr, Alan G.; Anderson, R. S.; Arain, M. Altaf; Baker, Ian T.; Black, T. A; Chen, Jing M.; Cook, R. B.; Gough, Christopher M.; Grant, Robert F.; Hollinger, David Y.; Izaurralde, R. Cesar; Kucharik, Christopher J.; Lafleur, Peter; Law, Beverly E.; Liu, Shuguang; Lokupitiya, Erandathie; Luo, Yiqi; Munger, J. William; Peng, Changhui; Poulter, Benjamin; Price, David T.; Ricciuto, Daniel M.; Riley, William J.; Sahoo, Alok Kumar; Schaefer, Kevin; Schwalm, C. R.; Tian, Hui; Verbeeck, Hans; Weng, Ensheng
Earth system processes exhibit complex patterns across time, as do the models that seek to replicate these processes. Model output may or may not be significantly related to observations at different times and on different frequencies. Conventional model diagnostics provide an aggregate view of model–data agreement, but usually do not identify the time and frequency patterns of model–data disagreement, leaving unclear the steps required to improve model response to environmental drivers that vary on characteristic frequencies. Wavelet coherence can quantify the times and timescales at which two time series, for example time series of models and measurements, are significantly different. We applied wavelet coherence to interpret the predictions of 20 ecosystem models from the North American Carbon Program (NACP) Site-Level Interim Synthesis when confronted with eddy-covariance-measured net ecosystem exchange (NEE) from 10 ecosystems with multiple years of available data. Models were grouped into classes with similar approaches for incorporating phenology, the calculation of NEE, the inclusion of foliar nitrogen (N), and the use of model–data fusion. Models with prescribed, rather than prognostic, phenology often fit NEE observations better on annual to interannual timescales in grassland, wetland and agricultural ecosystems. Models that calculated NEE as net primary productivity (NPP) minus heterotrophic respiration (HR) rather than gross ecosystem productivity (GPP) minus ecosystem respiration (ER) fit better on annual timescales in grassland and wetland ecosystems, but models that calculated NEE as GPP minus ER were superior on monthly to seasonal timescales in two coniferous forests. Models that incorporated foliar nitrogen (N) data were successful at capturing NEE variability on interannual (multiple year) timescales at Howland Forest, Maine. The model that employed a model–data fusion approach often, but not always, resulted in improved fit to data, suggesting that improving model parameterization is important but not the only step for improving model performance. Combined with previous findings, our results suggest that the mechanisms driving daily and annual NEE variability tend to be correctly simulated, but the magnitude of these fluxes is often erroneous, suggesting that model parameterization must be improved. Few NACP models correctly predicted fluxes on seasonal and interannual timescales where spectral energy in NEE observations tends to be low, but where phenological events, multi-year oscillations in climatological drivers, and ecosystem succession are known to be important for determining ecosystem function. Mechanistic improvements to models must be made to replicate observed NEE variability on seasonal and interannual timescales.
Toward a socioecological theory of forest macrosystems
(2018-04) Kleindl, William J.; Stoy, Paul C.; Binford, Michael W.; Desai, Ankur R.; Dietze, Michael C.; Schultz, Courtney A.; Starr, Gregory; Staudhammer, Christina L.; Wood, David J. A.
The implications of cumulative land-use decisions and shifting climate on forests, require us to integrate our understanding of ecosystems, markets, policy, and resource management into a social-ecological system. Humans play a central role in macrosystem dynamics, which complicates ecological theories that do not explicitly include human interactions. These dynamics also impact ecological services and related markets, which challenges economic theory. Here, we use two forest macroscale management initiatives to develop a theoretical understanding of how management interacts with ecological functions and services at these scales and how the multiple large-scale management goals work either in consort or conflict with other forest functions and services. We suggest that calling upon theories developed for organismal ecology, ecosystem ecology, and ecological economics adds to our understanding of social-ecological macrosystems. To initiate progress, we propose future research questions to add rigor to macrosystem-scale studies: (1) What are the ecosystem functions that operate at macroscales, their necessary structural components, and how do we observe them? (2) How do systems at one scale respond if altered at another scale? (3) How do we both effectively measure these components and interactions, and communicate that information in a meaningful manner for policy and management across different scales?