Spatial Processes and Land-atmosphere Flux Constraining ecosystem models with regional flux tower data assimilation Flux Measurements and Advanced Modeling,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Land Surface Evaporation 1. Key research issues 2. What we learnt from OASIS 3. Land surface evaporation using remote sensing 4. Data requirements Helen.
Advertisements

Why gap filling isn’t always easy Andrew Richardson University of New Hampshire Jena Gap Filling Workshop September 2006.
Carbon Cycling in a Warmer, Greener World The Incredible Unpredictable Plant Ankur R Desai University of Wisconsin-Madison CPEP Spring 2009.
Monitoring Effects of Interannual Variation in Climate and Fire Regime on Regional Net Ecosystem Production with Remote Sensing and Modeling D.P. Turner.
Ankur R Desai, UW-Madison AGU Fall 2007 B41F-03 Impact on Upper Midwest Regional Carbon Balance.
Markov-Chain Monte Carlo
Benefit of ASP, not generally being subjected to this:
Uncovering mechanisms of episodic methane sources observed by a very tall eddy covariance tower Ankur Desai, UW-Madison Atmospheric & Oceanic Sciences.
Computing the Posterior Probability The posterior probability distribution contains the complete information concerning the parameters, but need often.
Biosphere Modeling Galina Churkina MPI for Biogeochemistry.
Modeling approach to regional flux inversions at WLEF Modeling approach to regional flux inversions at WLEF Marek Uliasz Department of Atmospheric Science.
4. Testing the LAI model To accurately fit a model to a large data set, as in the case of the global-scale space-borne LAI data, there is a need for an.
Modeling framework for estimation of regional CO2 fluxes using concentration measurements from a ring of towers Modeling framework for estimation of regional.
Global Carbon Cycle Feedbacks: From pattern to process Dave Schimel NEON inc.
Spatial Processes and Land-atmosphere Flux Constraining regional ecosystem models with flux tower data assimilation Flux Measurements and Advanced Modeling,
Interannual variability across sites: Bridging the gap between flux towers and flasks Goals Obtain a mechanistic understanding of tower-scale interannual.
Phenological responses of NEE in the subboreal Controls on IAV by autumn zero- crossing and soil thermal profile Dr. Desai.
Optimising ORCHIDEE simulations at tropical sites Hans Verbeeck LSM/FLUXNET meeting June 2008, Edinburgh LSCE, Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de.
Paul R. Moorcroft David Medvigy, Stephen Wofsy, J. William Munger, M. Dietze Harvard University Developing a predictive science of the biosphere.
Applications of Bayesian sensitivity and uncertainty analysis to the statistical analysis of computer simulators for carbon dynamics Marc Kennedy Clive.
Page 1© Crown copyright WP4 Development of a System for Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation Richard Betts.
The role of the Chequamegon Ecosystem-Atmosphere Study in the U.S. Carbon Cycle Science Plan Ken Davis The Pennsylvania State University The 13 th ChEAS.
O AK R IDGE N ATIONAL L ABORATORY U. S. D EPARTMENT OF E NERGY 1 Vegetation/Ecosystem Modeling and Analysis Project (VEMAP) Lessons Learned or How to Do.
BIOME-BGC estimates fluxes and storage of energy, water, carbon, and nitrogen for the vegetation and soil components of terrestrial ecosystems. Model algorithms.
Results from the Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System (CCDAS) 3 FastOpt 4 2 Marko Scholze 1, Peter Rayner 2, Wolfgang Knorr 1 Heinrich Widmann 3, Thomas.
Translation to the New TCO Panel Beverly Law Prof. Global Change Forest Science Science Chair, AmeriFlux Network Oregon State University.
Characterizing observational and model uncertainty Kusum Naithani Department of Geography The Pennsylvania State University ChEAS 2012 Workshop.
Center for Radiative Shock Hydrodynamics Fall 2011 Review Assessment of predictive capability Derek Bingham 1.
Integration of biosphere and atmosphere observations Yingping Wang 1, Gabriel Abramowitz 1, Rachel Law 1, Bernard Pak 1, Cathy Trudinger 1, Ian Enting.
Some challenges of model-data- integration a collection of issues and ideas based on model evaluation excercises Martin Jung, Miguel Mahecha, Markus Reichstein,
Evaluation of land model simulations across multiple sites and multiple models: Results from the NACP site-level synthesis effort Peter Thornton 1, Gautam.
Satellite data, ecosystem models and site data: contributions of the IGBP flux network to carbon cycle science David Schimel, Galina Churkina, Eva Falge,
A parametric and process- oriented view of the carbon system.
Impacts of leaf phenology and water table on interannual variability of carbon fluxes in subboreal uplands and wetlands Implications for regional fluxes.
Application of the ORCHIDEE global vegetation model to evaluate biomass and soil carbon stocks of Qinghai-Tibetan grasslands Tan Kun.
Interannual Variability in the ChEAS Mesonet ChEAS XI, 12 August 2008 UNDERC-East, Land O Lakes, WI Ankur Desai Atmospheric & Oceanic Sciences, University.
Site-Level Model-Data Comparison A Proposed NACP Interim Synthesis Project Ken Davis, Peter Thornton, Kevin Schaefer, Dan Riciutto Coordinators.
Investigating Land-Atmosphere CO 2 Exchange with a Coupled Biosphere-Atmosphere Model: SiB3-RAMS K.D. Corbin, A.S. Denning, I. Baker, N. Parazoo, A. Schuh,
Using data assimilation to improve estimates of C cycling Mathew Williams School of GeoScience, University of Edinburgh.
Flux Measurements and Systematic Terrestrial Measurements 1.discuss gaps and opportunities What are gaps? 2. brainstorm ideas about collaborative projects.
Biases in land surface models Yingping Wang CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research.
Goal: to understand carbon dynamics in montane forest regions by developing new methods for estimating carbon exchange at local to regional scales. Activities:
Evapotranspiration Estimates over Canada based on Observed, GR2 and NARR forcings Korolevich, V., Fernandes, R., Wang, S., Simic, A., Gong, F. Natural.
CarboEurope: The Big Research Lines Annette Freibauer Ivan Janssens.
Model-Data Synthesis of CO 2 Fluxes at Niwot Ridge, Colorado Bill Sacks, Dave Schimel NCAR Climate & Global Dynamics Division Russ Monson CU Boulder Rob.
Chronosequence of soil respiration in ChEAS sites (sub-topic of spatial upscaling of carbon measurement) Jim Tang Department of Forest Resources University.
A challenge to the flux-tower upscaling hypothesis? A multi-tower comparison from the Chequamegon Ecosystem-Atmosphere Study K.J. Davis 1, D.R. Ricciuto.
Uncertainty Quantification in Climate Prediction Charles Jackson (1) Mrinal Sen (1) Gabriel Huerta (2) Yi Deng (1) Ken Bowman (3) (1)Institute for Geophysics,
Mechanistic model for light-controlled phenology - its implication on the seasonality of water and carbon fluxes in the Amazon rainforests Yeonjoo Kim.
Towards a robust, generalizable non-linear regression gap filling algorithm (NLR_EM) Ankur R Desai – National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Boulder,
Success and Failure of Implementing Data-driven Upscaling Using Flux Networks and Remote Sensing Jingfeng Xiao Complex Systems Research Center, University.
1 Chapter 8: Model Inference and Averaging Presented by Hui Fang.
Influence of Land Cover Heterogeneity, Land-Use Change and Management on the Regional Carbon Cycle in the Upper Midwest USA Ankur R Desai, Kenneth J Davis:
Inverse Modeling of Surface Carbon Fluxes Please read Peters et al (2007) and Explore the CarbonTracker website.
From eddies to the breath of the planet Flux towers, data assimilation, and the global carbon cycle Ankur Desai AOS, UW- Madison 907 Seminar 20 Feb 2008.
Data assimilation in C cycle science Strand 2 Team.
Results from the Reflex experiment Mathew Williams, Andrew Fox and the Reflex team.
The Water Cycle - Kickoff by Kevin Trenberth -Wide Ranging Discussion -Vapor -Precip/Clouds -Surface Hydrology (Land and Ocean) -Observations and scales.
Assimilation Modeling of CO2 Fluxes at Niwot Ridge, CO, and Strategy for Scaling up to the Region William J. Sacks David S. Schimel,
Comparison of GPP from Terra-MODIS and AmeriFlux Network Towers
Old and Not-So-Old Research Progress/Plans for Ankur Desai Penn State University, Department of Meteorology Cheas 2003 Meeting, Woodruff, WI, 29 June –
3-PG The Use of Physiological Principles in Predicting Forest Growth
Ecosystem Demography model version 2 (ED2)
Lake Superior Region Carbon Cycle
Atmospheric Tracers and the Great Lakes
From eddies to the breath of the planet
Coherence of parameters governing NEE variability in eastern U. S
Spatial Processes and Land-atmosphere Flux
Carbon Model-Data Fusion
Regional Carbon Fluxes in WI:
Presentation transcript:

Spatial Processes and Land-atmosphere Flux Constraining ecosystem models with regional flux tower data assimilation Flux Measurements and Advanced Modeling, 22 July 2008 CU Mountain Research Station, “Ned”, Colorado Ankur Desai Atmospheric & Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Let’s get spacey…

And regional

Why regional? Spatial interpolation/extrapolation Evaluation across scales Landscape level controls on biogeochem. Understand cause of spatial variability Emergent properties of landscapes

Why regional? Courtesy: Nic Saliendra

Why regional? NEP (=-NEE) at 13 sites Stand age matters Ecosystem type matters Is interannual variability coherent? Are we sampling sufficient land cover types”?

Why data assimilation? Meteorological, ecosystem, and parameter variability hard to observe/model Data assimilation can help isolate model mechanisms responsible for spatial variability Optimization across multiple types of data Optimization across space

Why data assimilation? Old way: –Make a model –Guess some parameters –Compare to data –Publish the best comparisons –Attribute discrepancies to error –Be happy

Why data assimilation? New way: –Constrain model(s) with observations –Find where model or parameters cannot explain observations –Learn something about fundamental interactions –Publish the discrepancies and knowledge gained –Work harder, be slightly less happy, but generate more knowledge

Back to those stats… [A|B] = [AB] / [B] [P|D] = ( [D|P] [P] ) / [D] (parameters given data) = [ (data given parameters)× (parameters) ] / (data) Posterior = (Likelihood x Prior) / Normalizing Constraint

For the visually minded D Nychka, NCAR

Some case studies Prediction Up and down scaling Regional evaluation Interannual variability Forest disturbance and succession

Regional Prediction

Our tower is bigger…

Is there a prediction signal?

Sipnet A “simplified” model of ecosystem carbon / water and land-atmosphere interaction –Minimal number of parameters –Driven by meteorological forcing Still has >60 parameters Braswell et al., 2005, GCB Sacks et al., 2006, GCB added snow Zobitz et al., 2008

Parameter estimation MCMC is an optimizing method to minimize model-data mismatch –Quasi-random walk through parameter space (Metropolis) Prior parameters distribution needed Start at many random places (Chains) in prior parameter space –Move “downhill” to minima in model-data RMS by randomly changing a parameter from current value to a nearby value –Avoid local minima by occasionally performing “uphill” moves in proportion to maximum likelihood of accepted point –Use simulated annealing to tune parameter space exploration –Pick best chain and continue space exploration –Requires ~500,000 model iterations (chain exploration, spin-up, sampling) –End result – “best” parameter set and confidence intervals (from all the iterations) –NEE, Latent Heat Flux (LE), Sensible Heat Flux (H), soil moisture can all be used Nighttime NEE good measure of respiration, maybe H? Daytime NEE, LE good measures of photosynthesis SipNET is fast (<10 ms year -1 ), so good for MCMC (4 hours for 7yr WLEF) –Based on PNET ecosystem model –Driven by climate, parameters and initial carbon pools –Trivially parallelizable (needs to be done, though)

Goldilocks effect…

2 years = 7 years

Regional futures

Upscaling and Downscaling

So many towers…

…so much variability

Simple comparisons… Desai et al, 2008, Ag For Met

…don’t work

We need to do better Lots of flux towers (how many?) Lots of cover types A very simple model Have to think about the tall tower flux, too –What does it sample?

Multi-tower synthesis aggregation with large number of towers (12) in same climate space –towers mapped to cover/age types –parameter optimization with minimal 2 equation model

Heterogeneous footprint

Tall tower downscaling Wang et al., 2006

Scaling evaluation Desai et al., 2008

Scaling sensitivity

Now we can wildly extrapolate Take 17 towers Fill the met data Use a simple model to estimate parameters for each tower using MCMC Apply parameters to other region meteorology data Scale to region by cover/age class

Another simple(r) model No carbon pools GPP model driven by LAI, PAR, Air temp, VPD, Precip LAI model driven by GDD (leaf on) and soil temp (leaf off) 3 pool ER, driven by Soil temp and GPP 19 parameters, fix 3

20 yr regional NEE Cover types + Age structure + Parameters Forcing for a lake organic carbon input model

Regional scale evaluation

Top down and bottom up

IAV not modeled well

Region Interannual variability

Ricciuto et al.

IAV Does growing season start explain IAV? Can a very simple model be constructed to explain IAV? –Hypothesis: growing season length explains IAV Can we make a cost function more attuned to IAV? –Hypothesis: MCMC overfits to hourly data

New cost function Original log likelihood computes sum of squared difference at hourly What if we also added monthly and annual squared differences to this likelihood? Have to scale these less frequent values

Regional Succession

History of land use

Ecosystem Demography Moorcroft et al., 2001; Albani et al., 2006; Desai et al., 2007 Height and age structured statistical gap model Well suited to data assimilation of regional inventory data (e.g., USFS FIA) –Use multiple FIA observation periods - estimate carbon pools by allometry, segregate by type, age, height classes –Tune growth parameters until forest growth matches FIA growth

Enough?

What did we learn? Spatial prediction, scaling, parameterizing all benefit from data assimilation Interannual variability has interesting spatial attributes that are hard to model! Wetlands and land use history matter You can’t build infinite towers, or even a sufficient number –Use data assim to discover optimal design? Spatial covariate information needs a formal way to be used in data assimilation

Where is your research headed? What questions do you have? –Mechanisms, forcings, inference, evaluation, prediction, estimating error or uncertainty What kinds of data do you have, can get, can steal? –“Method-hopping” A model can mean many things… Data assimilation can be another tool in your toolbox to answer questions, discover new ones

Data assimilation uses Not just limited to ecosystem carbon flux models E.g. estimating surface or boundary layer values (e.g., z 0 ), advection, transpiration, data gaps, tracer transport Many kinds, for estimating state or parameters

TOMORROW Lab - 6 hour tour Sipnet at Niwot Ridge Parameter estimation with MCMC Sipnet group projects –Several ideas: parameter sensitivity across sites, gap filling, prediction, regional extrapolation

Enough! Time for a beer?