8 research outputs found
Diurnal and Seasonal Solar Induced Chlorophyll Fluorescence and Photosynthesis in a Boreal Scots Pine Canopy
Solar induced chlorophyll fluorescence has been shown to be increasingly an useful proxy for the estimation of gross primary productivity (GPP), at a range of spatial scales. Here, we explore the seasonality in a continuous time series of canopy solar induced fluorescence (hereafter SiF) and its relation to canopy gross primary production (GPP), canopy light use efficiency (LUE), and direct estimates of leaf level photochemical efficiency in an evergreen canopy. SiF was calculated using infilling in two bands from the incoming and reflected radiance using a pair of Ocean Optics USB2000+ spectrometers operated in a dual field of view mode, sampling at a 30 min time step using custom written automated software, from early spring through until autumn in 2011. The optical system was mounted on a tower of 18 m height adjacent to an eddy covariance system, to observe a boreal forest ecosystem dominated by Scots pine. (Pinus sylvestris) A Walz MONITORING-PAM, multi fluorimeter system, was simultaneously mounted within the canopy adjacent to the footprint sampled by the optical system. Following correction of the SiF data for O2 and structural effects, SiF, SiF yield, LUE, the photochemicsl reflectance index (PRI), and the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) exhibited a seasonal pattern that followed GPP sampled by the eddy covariance system. Due to the complexities of solar azimuth and zenith angle (SZA) over the season on the SiF signal, correlations between SiF, SiF yield, GPP, and LUE were assessed on SZ
On the Functional Relationship Between Fluorescence and Photochemical Yields in Complex Evergreen Needleleaf Canopies
Recent advancements in understanding remotely sensed solarβinduced chlorophyll fluorescence often suggest a linear relationship with gross primary productivity at large spatial scales. However, the quantum yields of fluorescence and photochemistry are not linearly related, and this relationship is largely driven by irradiance. This raises questions about the mechanistic basis of observed linearity from complex canopies that experience heterogeneous irradiance regimes at subcanopy scales. We present empirical data from two evergreen forest sites that demonstrate a nonlinear relationship between needleβscale observations of steadyβstate fluorescence yield and photochemical yield under ambient irradiance. We show that accounting for subcanopy and diurnal patterns of irradiance can help identify the physiological constraints on needleβscale fluorescence at 70β80% accuracy. Our findings are placed in the context of how solarβinduced chlorophyll fluorescence observations from spaceborne sensors relate to diurnal variation in canopyβscale physiology
The roles of radiative, structural and physiological information of sun-induced chlorophyll fluorescence in predicting gross primary production of a corn crop at various temporal scales
Extensive research suggests that sun-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF) and gross primary productivity (GPP) have a near-linear relationship, providing a promising avenue for estimating the carbon uptake of ecosystems. However, the factors influencing the relationship are not yet clear. This study examines the roles of SIF's radiative, structural, and physiological information in predicting GPP, based on four years of field observations of a corn canopy at various temporal scales. We quantified SIF's radiative component by measuring the intensity of incident photosynthetically active radiation (iPAR), and separated the structural and physiological components from SIF observations using the fluorescence correction vegetation index (FCVI). Our results show that the R2 values between SIF and GPP, as estimated by linear models, increased from 0.66 at a half-hour resolution to 0.86 at a one-month resolution. In comparison, the product of FCVI and iPAR, representing the non-physiological information of SIF, performed consistently well in predicting GPP with R2>0.84 at various temporal scales, suggesting a limited contribution of the physiological information of SIF for GPP estimation. The results further reveal that SIF's radiative and structural components positively impacted the SIF-GPP linearity, while the physiological component had a negative impact on the linearity for most cases, changing from 0.6 % to -27.5 %. As for the temporal dependency, the controls of the SIF-GPP relationship moved from radiation at diurnal scales to structure at the seasonal scales. The structural contribution changed from 14.8 % at a half-hour resolution to 92.4 % at a one-month resolution, while the radiative contribution decreased from 118.0 % at a half-hour resolution to 11.7 % at a one-month resolution. This study contributes to enhancing our understanding of the physiological information conveyed by SIF and the factors influencing the temporal dependency of the SIF-GPP relationship.</p
Recommended from our members
Assessing the Potential for Solar-Induced Chlorophyll Fluorescence to Inform Evapotranspiration Partitioning
Transpiration (T), or the evaporation of water through plant stomata, plays a critical role in climate and biophysical processes at the earthβs surface. While T makes up a majority of the terrestrial evapotranspiration (ET) flux on a global scale, the partitioning of ET is variable and remains elusive. Because photosynthetic carbon uptake and T are strongly coupled by stomatal gas exchange, many ET partitioning approaches leverage information on photosynthesis. Here we examine the ability of solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF), an optical signal stemming from the photosynthetic machinery, to inform ET partitioning. We conducted a field campaign in a hazelnut orchard during the 2019 growing season, simultaneously observing SIF, ET from eddy covariance, and T derived from sap flux measurements. Additionally, we inverted the Penman-Monteith equation using both evaporative fluxes to examine the relationship between SIF and canopy conductance. SIF explained more variation in T than ET at all time scales considered and was more strongly coupled to T on a diurnal basis. The relationships between SIF and both canopy conductances were weak and nonlinear when considering the data at the half-hour measurement interval, but at the daily scale SIF had a statistically significant, inverse linear relationships with canopy conductance. This relationship was stronger when canopy conductance was derived from T, and adding SIF to an empirical model of canopy conductance derived from T improved predictions. This work demonstrates that SIF provides additional information on biological control of T and has potential to improve ET partitioning when combined with meteorological observations
κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μ격 μΌμ± μμ€ν λ€μ μ΄μ©ν μ§μμ μλ¬Ό κ³μ λ° νμ μ λ μ½λ‘μ νκ΄λ¬Όμ§ κ΄μΈ‘
νμλ
Όλ¬Έ(λ°μ¬) -- μμΈλνκ΅λνμ : νκ²½λνμ νλκ³Όμ μ‘°κ²½ν, 2022.2. λ₯μλ ¬.Monitoring phenology, physiological and structural changes in vegetation is essential to understand feedbacks of vegetation between terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere by influencing the albedo, carbon flux, water flux and energy. To this end, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF) from satellite remote sensing have been widely used. However, there are still limitations in satellite remote sensing as 1) satellite imagery could not capture fine-scale spatial resolution of SIF signals, 2) satellite products are strongly influenced by condition of the atmosphere (e.g. clouds), thus it is challenging to know physiological and structural changes in vegetation on cloudy days and 3) satellite imagery captured a mixed signal from over- and understory, thus it is difficult to study the difference between overstory and understory phenology separately. Therefore, in order to more accurately understand the signals observed from the satellite, further studies using near-surface remote sensing system to collect ground-based observed data are needed.
The main purpose of this dissertation is continuous observation of vegetation phenology and SIF using near-surface remote sensing system. To achieve the main goal, I set three chapters as 1) developing low-cost filter-based near-surface remote sensing system to monitor SIF continuously, 2) monitoring SIF in a temperate evergreen needleleaf forest continuously, and 3) understanding the relationships between phenology from in-situ multi-layer canopies and satellite products.
In Chapter 2, I developed the filter-based smart surface sensing system (4S-SIF) to overcome the technical challenges of monitoring SIF in the field as well as to decrease sensor cost for more comprehensive spatial sampling. I verified the satisfactory spectral performance of the bandpass filters and confirmed that digital numbers (DN) from 4S-SIF exhibited linear relationships with the DN from the hyperspectral spectroradiometer in each band (R2 > 0.99). In addition, we confirmed that 4S-SIF shows relatively low variation of dark current value at various temperatures. Furthermore, the SIF signal from 4S-SIF represents a strong linear relationship with QEpro-SIF either changing the physiological mechanisms of the plant using DCMU (3-(3, 4-dichlorophenyl)-1, 1-dimethyurea) treatment. I believe that 4S-SIF will be a useful tool for collecting in-situ data across multiple spatial and temporal scales.
Satellite-based SIF provides us with new opportunities to understand the physiological and structural dynamics of vegetation from canopy to global scales. However, the relationships between SIF and gross primary productivity (GPP) are not fully understood, which is mainly due to the challenges of decoupling structural and physiological factors that control the relationships. In Chapter 3, I reported the results of continuous observations of canopy-level SIF, GPP, absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (APAR), and chlorophyll: carotenoid index (CCI) in a temperate evergreen needleleaf forest. To understand the mechanisms underlying the relationship between GPP and SIF, I investigated the relationships of light use efficiency (LUE_p), chlorophyll fluorescence yield (Ξ¦_F), and the fraction of emitted SIF photons escaping from the canopy (f_esc) separately. I found a strongly non-linear relationship between GPP and SIF at diurnal and seasonal time scales (R2 = 0.91 with a hyperbolic regression function, daily). GPP saturated with APAR, while SIF did not. In addition, there were differential responses of LUE_p and Ξ¦_F to air temperature. While LUE_p reached saturation at high air temperatures, Ξ¦_F did not saturate. I also found that the canopy-level chlorophyll: carotenoid index was strongly correlated to canopy-level Ξ¦_F (R2 = 0.84) implying that Ξ¦_F could be more closely related to pigment pool changes rather than LUE_p. In addition, I found that the f_esc contributed to a stronger SIF-GPP relationship by partially capturing the response of LUE_p to diffuse light. These findings can help refine physiological and structural links between canopy-level SIF and GPP in evergreen needleleaf forests.
We do not fully understand what satellite NDVI derived leaf-out and full leaf dates actually observe because deciduous broadleaf forest consists of multi-layer canopies typically and mixed-signal from multi-layer canopies could affect satellite observation. Ultimately, we have the following question: What phenology do we actually see from space compared to ground observations on multi-layer canopy phenology? In Chapter 4, I reported the results of 8 years of continuous observations of multi-layer phenology and climate variables in a deciduous broadleaf forest, South Korea. Multi-channel spectrometers installed above and below overstory canopy allowed us to monitor over- and understory canopy phenology separately, continuously. I evaluated the widely used phenology detection methods, curvature change rate and threshold with NDVI observed above top of the canopy and compared leaf-out and full leaf dates from both methods to in-situ observed multi-layer phenology. First, I found that NDVI from the above canopy had a strong linear relationship with satellites NDVI (R2=0.95 for MODIS products and R2= 0.85 for Landsat8). Second, leaf-out dates extracted by the curvature change rate method and 10% threshold were well matched with understory leaf-out dates. Third, the full-leaf dates extracted by the curvature change rate method and 90% threshold were similar to overstory full-leaf dates. Furthermore, I found that overstory leaf-out dates were closely correlated to accumulated growing degree days (AGDD) while understory leaf-out dates were related to AGDD and also sensitive to the number of chill days (NCD). These results suggest that satellite-based leaf-out and full leaf dates represent understory and overstory signals in the deciduous forest site, which requires caution when using satellite-based phenology data into future prediction as overstory and understory canopy show different sensitivities to AGDD and NCD.μλ¬Ό κ³μ λ° μμμ μ리νμ , ꡬ쑰μ μΈ λ³νλ₯Ό μ§μμ μΌλ‘ λͺ¨λν°λ§ νλ κ²μ μ‘μμνκ³μ λκΈ°κΆ μ¬μ΄μ μλμ§, νμ μν λ±μ νΌλλ°±μ μ΄ν΄νλλ° νμμ μ΄λ€. μ΄λ₯Ό κ΄μΈ‘νκΈ° μνμ¬ μμ±μμ κ΄μΈ‘λ μ κ·ν μμ μ§μ (NDVI) νμ μ λ μ½λ‘μ νκ΄λ¬Όμ§ (SIF)λ λμ€μ μΌλ‘ μ¬μ©λκ³ μλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ, μ°μ£Ό μμ± κΈ°λ°μ μλ£λ λ€μκ³Ό κ°μ νκ³μ λ€μ΄ μ‘΄μ¬νλ€. 1) μμ§κΉμ§ κ³ ν΄μλμ μμ± κΈ°λ° SIF μλ£λ μκ³ , 2) μμ± μλ£λ€μ λκΈ°μ μ§ (μ, ꡬλ¦)μ μν₯μ λ°μ, νλ¦° λ μ μμμ μ리νμ , ꡬ쑰μ λ³νλ₯Ό νμ§νκΈ° νλ€λ€. λν, 3) μμ± μ΄λ―Έμ§λ μλΆ μμκ³Ό νλΆ μμμ΄ νΌν©λμ΄ μμΈ μ νΈλ₯Ό νμ§νκΈ° λλ¬Έμ, κ° μΈ΅μ μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ κ°κ° μ°κ΅¬νκΈ°μ μ΄λ €μμ΄ μλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ―λ‘, μμ±μμ νμ§ν μ νΈλ₯Ό νκ°νκ³ , μμμ μ리νμ , ꡬ쑰μ λ³νλ₯Ό λ³΄λ€ μ νν μ΄ν΄νκΈ° μν΄μλ κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μ격 μΌμ± μμ€ν
μ μ΄μ©ν μ€μΈ‘ μλ£ κΈ°λ°μ μ°κ΅¬λ€μ΄ μꡬλλ€. λ³Έ νμλ
Όλ¬Έμ μ£Ό λͺ©μ μ κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μ격 μΌμ± μμ€ν
μ μ΄μ©νμ¬ μλ¬Ό κ³μ λ° SIFλ₯Ό νμ₯μμ μ§μμ μΌλ‘ μ€μΈ‘νκ³ , μμ± μμ κΈ°λ°μ μ°κ΅¬κ° κ°κ³ μλ νκ³μ λ° κΆκΈμ¦λ€μ ν΄κ²° λ° λ³΄μνλ κ²μ΄λ€. μ΄ λͺ©μ μ λ¬μ±νκΈ° μνμ¬, μλμ κ°μ μΈκ°μ§ Chapter: 1) SIFλ₯Ό κ΄μΈ‘νκΈ° μν νν° κΈ°λ°μ μ λ ΄ν κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μΌμ± μμ€ν
κ°λ°, 2)μ¨λ μΉ¨μ½μλ¦Όμμμ μ°μμ μΈ SIF κ΄μΈ‘, 3)μμ± κΈ°λ°μ μλ¬Ό κ³μ κ³Ό μ€μΈ‘ν λ€μΈ΅ μμμ μλ¬Ό κ³μ λΉκ΅λ‘ ꡬμ±νκ³ , μ΄λ₯Ό μ§ννμλ€.
SIFλ μμμ ꡬ쑰μ , μ리νμ λ³νλ₯Ό μ΄ν΄νκ³ , μΆμ νλ μΈμλ‘ μ¬μ©λ μ μμ΄, SIFλ₯Ό νμ₯μμ κ΄μΈ‘νκΈ° μν λ€μν κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μ격 μΌμ± μμ€ν
λ€μ΄ μ΅κ·Ό μ μλμ΄ μ€κ³ μλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ, μμ§κΉμ§ SIFλ₯Ό κ΄μΈ‘νκΈ° μν μμ
μ μΌλ‘ μ ν΅λλ κ΄μΈ‘ μμ€ν
μ νμ ν λΆμ‘±νλ©°, λΆκ΄κ³μ ꡬ쑰μ νΉμ±μ νμ₯μμ κ΄μΈ‘ μμ€ν
μ 보μ λ° κ΄λ¦¬νκΈ°κ° μ΄λ €μ λμ μ§μ SIFλ₯Ό μ·¨λνλ κ²μ λ§€μ° λμ μ μΈ λΆμΌμ΄λ€. λ³Έ νμ λ
Όλ¬Έμ Chapter 2μμλ SIFλ₯Ό νμ₯μμ λ³΄λ€ μμ½κ² κ΄μΈ‘νκΈ° μν νν° κΈ°λ°μ κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μΌμ± μμ€ν
(Smart Surface Sensing System, 4S-SIF)μ κ°λ°νμλ€. μΌμλ λμ νν°λ€κ³Ό ν¬ν λ€μ΄μ€λκ° κ²°ν©λμ΄ μμΌλ©°, μ보 λͺ¨ν°λ₯Ό μ¬μ©νμ¬ λμ νν° λ° κ΄μΈ‘ λ°©ν₯μ μλμ μΌλ‘ λ³κ²½ν¨μΌλ‘μ¨, ν κ°μ ν¬ν λ€μ΄μ€λκ° 3κ°μ νμ₯ λ²μ(757, 760, 770 nm)μ λΉ λ° νμμΌλ‘λΆν° μ
μ¬λλ κ΄λκ³Ό μμμΌλ‘ λ°μ¬/λ°©μΆλ κ΄λμ κ΄μΈ‘ν μ μλλ‘ κ³ μλμλ€. ν¬ν λ€μ΄μ€λλ‘λΆν° μΈμλ λμ§νΈ μμΉ κ°μ μμ
μ μΌλ‘ ν맀λλ μ΄κ³ ν΄μλ λΆκ΄κ³(QE Pro, Ocean Insight)μ λλ ·ν μ ν κ΄κ³λ₯Ό 보μ΄λ κ²μ νμΈνμλ€ (R2 > 0.99). μΆκ°μ μΌλ‘, 4S-SIFμμ κ΄μΈ‘λ SIFμ μ΄κ³ ν΄μλ λΆκ΄κ³λ₯Ό μ΄μ©νμ¬ μΆμΆν SIFκ° μ νμ μΈ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό μ΄λ£¨λ κ²μ νμΈνμλ€. μμμ μ리νμ λ³νλ₯Ό μΌμΌν€λ νν λ¬Όμ§μΈ DCMU(3-(3, 4-dichlorophenyl)-1, 1-dimethyurea)μ μ²λ¦¬νμμλ λΆκ΅¬νκ³ , μ°μΆλ SIFλ€μ μ ν κ΄κ³λ₯Ό 보μλ€. λ³Έ μΌμλ κΈ°μ‘΄ μμ€ν
λ€μ λΉν΄ μ¬μ©νκΈ° μ½κ³ κ°λ¨νλ©°, μ λ ΄νκΈ° λλ¬Έμ λ€μν μ곡κ°μ μ€μΌμΌμ SIFλ₯Ό κ΄μΈ‘ν μ μλ€λ μ₯μ μ΄ μλ€.
μμ± κΈ°λ°μ SIFλ₯Ό μ΄μ©νμ¬ μ΄μΌμ°¨μμ°μ±(gross primary productivity, GPP)μ μΆμ νλ μ°κ΅¬λ μ΅κ·Ό νμ μν μ°κ΅¬ λΆμΌμμ κ°κ΄λ°κ³ μλ μ°κ΅¬ μ£Όμ μ΄λ€. κ·Έλ¬λ, SIFμ GPPμ κ΄κ³λ μ¬μ ν λ§μ λΆνμ€μ±μ μ§λκ³ μλλ°, μ΄λ SIF-GPP κ΄κ³λ₯Ό μ‘°μ νλ μμμ ꡬ쑰μ λ° μ리νμ μμΈμ λ°λ‘ λΆλ¦¬νμ¬ κ³ μ°°ν μ°κ΅¬λ€μ΄ λΆμ‘±νκΈ° λλ¬Έμ΄λ€. λ³Έ νμ λ
Όλ¬Έμ Chapter 3μμλ μ§μμ μΌλ‘ SIF, GPP, ν‘μλ κ΄ν©μ±μ ν¨λ³΅μ¬λ (absorbed photosynthetically active radiation, APAR), κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ ν΄λ‘λ‘νκ³Ό μΉ΄λ‘ν°λ
Έμ΄λμ λΉμ¨ μΈμ (chlorophyll: carotenoid index, CCI)λ₯Ό μ¨λμΉ¨μ½μλ¦Όμμ μ°μμ μΌλ‘ κ΄μΈ‘νμλ€. SIF-GPP κ΄κ³μ ꡬ체μ μΈ λ©μ»€λμ¦ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό λ°νκΈ° μνμ¬, κ΄ μ΄μ©ν¨μ¨ (light use efficiency, LUE_p), μ½λ‘μ νκ΄ μλλ₯ (chlorophyll fluorescence yield, Ξ¦_F) κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ SIF κ΄μκ° κ΅°λ½μΌλ‘λΆν° λ°©μΆλλ λΉμ¨ (escape fraction, f_esc)μ κ°κ° λμΆνκ³ νꡬνμλ€. SIFμ GPPμ κ΄κ³λ λλ ·ν λΉ μ νμ μΈ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό 보μ΄λ κ²μ νμΈνμΌλ©°(R2 = 0.91 with a hyperbolic regression function, daily), μΌμ£ΌκΈ° λ¨μμμ SIFλ APARμ λν΄ μ νμ μ΄μμ§λ§ GPPλ APARμ λν΄ λλ ·ν ν¬ν κ΄κ³λ₯Ό 보μ΄λ κ²μ νμΈνμλ€. μΆκ°μ μΌλ‘ LUE_p μ Ξ¦_F κ° λκΈ° μ¨λμ λ°λΌ λ°μνλ μ λκ° λ€λ₯Έ κ²μ νμΈνμλ€. LUE_pλ λμ μ¨λμμ ν¬ν λμμ§λ§, Ξ¦_Fλ ν¬ν ν¨ν΄μ νμΈν μ μμλ€. λν, κ΅°λ½ μμ€μμμ CCIμ Ξ¦_Fκ° λλ ·ν μκ΄ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό 보μλ€(R2 = 0.84). μ΄λ Ξ¦_Fκ° μ½λ‘μ μμμ μν₯μ LUE_pμ λΉν΄ λ κ°ν κ΄κ³κ° μμ μ μμμ μμ¬νλ€. λ§μ§λ§μΌλ‘, f_escκ° νμκ΄μ μ°λλ μ λμ λ°λΌ λ°μμ νμ¬, Ξ¦_Fμ LUE_pμ κ°ν μκ΄ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό νμ±νλλ° κΈ°μ¬νλ κ²μ νμΈνμλ€. μ΄λ¬ν λ°κ²¬μ μ¨λ μΉ¨μ½μλ¦Όμμ κ΅°λ½ μμ€μ SIF-GPPκ΄κ³λ₯Ό μ리νμ λ° κ΅¬μ‘°μ μΈ‘λ©΄μμ μ΄ν΄νκ³ κ·λͺ
νλλ° ν° λμμ΄ λ κ²μ΄λ€.
μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ μμμ΄ μ² μ λ°λΌ μ£ΌκΈ°μ μΌλ‘ λνλ΄λ λ³νλ₯Ό κ΄μΈ‘νλ λ°μμ΄λ€. μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ μ‘μμνκ³μ λκΈ°κΆ μ¬μ΄μ λ¬Όμ§ μνμ μ΄ν΄νλλ° λ§€μ° μ€μνλ€. μμ± κΈ°λ°μ NDVIλ μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ νμ§νκ³ μ°κ΅¬νλλ° κ°μ₯ λμ€μ μΌλ‘ μ¬μ©λλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ, νμ½μλ¦Όμμμ μμ± NDVI κΈ°λ°μ κ°μ½ μκΈ° λ° μ±μ μκΈ°κ° μ€μ μ΄λ μμ μ νμ§νλμ§λ λΆλΆλͺ
νλ€. μ€μ νμ½μλ¦Όμ λ€μΈ΅ μμ ꡬ쑰μ μΌμ°¨μμΌλ‘ μ΄λ£¨μ΄μ Έ μλ λ°λ©΄, μμ± μμμ λ€μΈ΅ μμμ μ νΈκ° μμ¬ μλ μ΄μ°¨μμ κ²°κ³Όλ¬Όμ΄κΈ° λλ¬Έμ΄λ€. λ°λΌμ, μμ± NDVI κΈ°λ°μ μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ΄ λ€μΈ΅ μμ ꡬ쑰λ₯Ό μ΄λ£¨κ³ μλ νμ½μλ¦Όμμ μ€μ νμ₯ κ΄μΈ‘κ³Ό λΉκ΅νμμ λ μ΄λ μμ μ νμ§νλμ§μ λν κΆκΈμ¦μ΄ λ¨λλ€. λ³Έ νμ λ
Όλ¬Έμ Chapter 4μμλ μ§μμ μΌλ‘ 8λ
λμ νμ½μλ¦Όλ΄μ λ€μΈ΅ μμμ μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μ격 μΌμ± μμ€ν
μ μ΄μ©νμ¬ κ΄μΈ‘νκ³ , μμ± NDVI κΈ°λ°μ μλ¬Ό κ³μ κ³Ό λΉκ΅νμλ€. λ€μ±λ λΆκ΄κ³λ₯Ό μλΆ μμμ μμ μλμ μ€μΉν¨μΌλ‘μ¨, μλΆ μμκ³Ό νλΆ μμμ μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ κ°κ° μ°μμ μΌλ‘ κ΄μΈ‘νμλ€. μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ νμ§νκΈ° μνμ¬ κ°μ₯ λ§μ΄ μ¬μ©λλ λ°©λ²μΈ 1) μμΉλ₯Ό μ΄μ©νλ λ°©λ²κ³Ό 2) μ΄κ³λν¨μλ₯Ό μ΄μ©νλ λ°©λ²μ μ¬μ©νμ¬ κ°μ½ μκΈ° λ° μ±μ μκΈ°λ₯Ό κ³μ°νκ³ μ΄λ₯Ό λ€μΈ΅ μμμ μλ¬Ό κ³μ κ³Ό λΉκ΅νμλ€. λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬ κ²°κ³Ό, 첫λ²μ§Έλ‘, κ΅°λ½μ μμΈ΅λΆμμ μ€μΈ‘ν NDVIμ μμ± κΈ°λ°μ NDVIκ° κ°ν μ ν κ΄κ³λ₯Ό 보μ΄λ κ²μ νμΈνλ€ (R2=0.95 λ MODIS μμλ€ λ° R2= 0.85 λ Landsat8). λλ²μ§Έλ‘, μ΄κ³λν¨μ λ°©λ²κ³Ό 10%μ μμΉ κ°μ μ΄μ©ν λ°©λ²μ΄ λΉμ·ν κ°μ½ μκΈ°λ₯Ό μΆμ νλ κ²μ νμΈνμμΌλ©°, νλΆ μμμ κ°μ½ μκΈ°μ λΉμ·ν μκΈ°μμ νμΈνμλ€. μΈλ²μ§Έλ‘, μ΄κ³λν¨μ λ°©λ²κ³Ό 90%μ μμΉ κ°μ μ΄μ©ν λ°©λ²μ΄ λΉμ·ν μ±μ μκΈ°λ₯Ό μ°μΆνμμΌλ©°, μ΄λ μλΆ μμμ μ±μ μκΈ°μ λΉμ·νμλ€. μΆκ°μ μΌλ‘ μλΆ μμμ κ°μ½ μκΈ°μ νλΆ μμμ κ°μ½ μκΈ°κ° μ¨λμ λ°μνλ μ λκ° λλ ·νκ² μ°¨μ΄κ° λλ κ²μ νμΈν μ μμλ€. μλΆ μμμ κ°μ½ μκΈ°λ μ μ° μμ₯ μ¨λ μΌμ (AGDD)μ κ°ν μκ΄μ±μ 보μκ³ , νλΆ μμμ κ°μ½ μκΈ°λ AGDDμ μ°κ΄μ±μ κ°κ³ μμ λΏλ§ μλλΌ μΆμ μΌμ(NCD)μλ λ―Όκ°νκ² λ°μνλ κ²μ νμΈνμλ€. μ΄λ¬ν κ²°κ³Όλ μμ± NDVI κΈ°λ°μ κ°μ½ μκΈ°λ νλΆ μμμ κ°μ½ μκΈ°μ μ°κ΄μ±μ΄ λκ³ , μ±μ μκΈ°λ μλΆ μμμ μ±μ μκΈ°μ λΉμ·νλ€λ κ²μ μλ―Ένλ€. λν, μλΆ μμκ³Ό νλΆ μμμ΄ μ¨λμ λ€λ₯Έ λ―Όκ°μ±μ κ°κ³ μμ΄, μμ±μμ μ°μΆλ μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ μ΄μ©νμ¬ κΈ°νλ³νλ₯Ό μ΄ν΄νκ³ μ ν λ, μ΄λ€ μΈ΅μ μμμ΄ μμ± μμμ μ£Όλ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλμ§ κ³ λ €ν΄μΌ νλ€λ κ²μ μμ¬νλ€.
μμ±μ λμ μ§μμ λ³νλ₯Ό μμ½κ² λͺ¨λν°λ§ν μ μμ΄ λ§μ κ°λ₯μ±μ κ°κ³ μλ λꡬμ΄μ§λ§, λ³΄λ€ μ νν μμ± κ΄μΈ‘ κ°μ μ΄ν΄νκΈ° μν΄μλ νμ₯μμ κ΄μΈ‘λ μλ£λ₯Ό κΈ°λ°μΌλ‘ ν κ²μ¦μ΄ μꡬλλ€. λ³Έ νμ λ
Όλ¬Έμμλ 1) κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μΌμ± μμ€ν
μ κ°λ°, 2) κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μΌμ± μμ€ν
μ νμ©ν μμμ μ리νμ ꡬ쑰μ λ³νμ μ§μμ μΈ κ΄μΈ‘, 3) λ€μΈ΅ μμ ꡬ쑰μμ κ΄μΈ‘λλ μλ¬Ό κ³μ λ° μμ±μμ μΆμ λ μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ μ°κ΄μ± νκ°λ₯Ό μννμλ€. κ°λ°ν κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μΌμλ μμ
μΌμλ€κ³Ό λΉκ΅νμ λ, κ°κ²©μ μΌλ‘ μ λ ΄νκ³ μ μ½κ² μ¬μ©ν μ μμμΌλ©°, μ±λ₯μ μΌλ‘λ λΆμ‘±ν¨μ΄ μμλ€. κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μΌμ± μμ€ν
μ μ΄μ©νμ¬ SIFλ₯Ό μ¨λ μΉ¨μ½μλ¦Όμμ μ§μμ μΌλ‘ κ΄μΈ‘ν κ²°κ³Ό, μ΄μΌμ°¨μμ°μ±κ³Ό SIFλ λΉμ ν κ΄κ³λ₯Ό κ°λ κ²μ νμΈνμλ€. μ΄λ λ§μ μ ν μ°κ΅¬λ€μμ λ°νν μμ± κΈ°λ°μ SIFμ GPPκ° μ νμ μΈ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό 보μΈλ€λ κ²κ³Όλ λ€μ μλ°λ κ²°κ³Όμ΄λ€. λ€μΈ‘ μμμ λ΄μ² μλ¬Ό κ³μ μ μ°μμ μΌλ‘ κ΄μΈ‘νκ³ , μμ± κΈ°λ°μ μλ¬Ό κ³μ κ³Ό λΉκ΅νκ°ν μ°κ΅¬μμλ μμ± κΈ°λ°μ κ°μ½ μκΈ°λ νλΆ μμμ μν₯μ μ£Όλ‘ λ°κ³ , μ±μ μκΈ°λ μλΆ μμμ μκΈ°μ λΉμ·ν κ²μ νμΈνμλ€. μ¦, κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μΌμ± μμ€ν
μ μ΄μ©νμ¬ νμ₯μμ μ€μΈ‘ν κ²°κ³Όλ μμ± μμμ νμ©ν μ°κ΅¬λ€κ³Όλ λ€λ₯Έ κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό λ³΄μΌ μλ μμΌλ©°, μμ± μμμ νκ° λ° μ΄ν΄νλλ° μ¬μ©λ μ μλ€. λ°λΌμ, λ³΄λ€ μ νν μμμ ꡬ쑰μ , μ리νμ λ©μ»€λμ¦μ μ΄ν΄νκΈ° μν΄μλ κ·Όμ νλ©΄ μΌμ±μ νμ©ν νμ₯μμ ꡬμΆν μλ£ κΈ°λ°μ λ λ§μ μ°κ΅¬λ€μ΄ νμνλ€λ κ²μ μμ¬νλ€.Abstract i
Chapter 1. Introduction 2
1. Background 2
2. Purpose 5
Chapter 2. Monitoring SIF using a filter-based near surface remote sensing system 9
1. Introduction 9
2. Instrument desing and technical spefications of the filter-based smart surface sensing system (4S-SIF) 12
2.1. Ultra-narrow band pass filter 14
2.2. Calibration of 4S-SIF 15
2.3. Temperature and humidity response 16
2.4. Evaluate SIF quality from 4S-SIF in the field 17
3. Results 20
4. Discussion 23
Chapter 3. SIF is non-linearly related to canopy photosynthesis in a temperate evergreen needleleaf forest during fall transition 27
1. Introduction 27
2. Methods and Materials 31
2.1. Study site 31
2.2. Leaf-level fluorescence measurement 32
2.3. Canopy-level SIF and spectral reflectance measurement 34
2.4. SIF retrieval 37
2.5. Canopy-level photosynthesis estimates 38
2.6. Meteorological variables and APAR 39
2.7. Statistical analysis 40
3. Results 41
4. Discussion 48
4.1. Non-linear relationships between SIF and GPP 49
4.2. Role of f_esc in SIF-GPP relationship 53
4.3. Implications of non-linear SIF-GPP relationship in temperate ENF 54
5. Conclusion 57
6. Appendix 59
Chapter 4. Monitoring spring phenology of multi-layer canopy in a deciduous broadleaf forest: What signal do satellites actually see in space 65
1. Introduction 65
2. Materials and Methods 69
2.1. Study site 69
2.2. Multi-layer spectral reflectance and transmittance measurement 70
2.3. Phenometrics detection 72
2.4. In-situ multi-layer phenology 74
2.5. Satellite remote sensing data 75
2.6. Meteorological variables 75
3. Results 76
3.1. Seasonal to interannual variations of NDVI, 1-transmittance, and air temperature 76
3.2. Inter-annual variation of leaf-out and full-leaf dates 78
3.3. The relationships between dates calculated according tothreshold and in-situ multi-layer phenology 80
3.4. The relationship between multi-layer phenology, AGDD and NCD 81
4. Discussion 82
4.1. How do satellite-based leaf-out and full-leaf dates differ from in-situ multi-layer phenology 83
4.2. Are the 10 % and 90 % thresholds from satellite-basedNDVI always well matched with the leaf-out and full-leaf dates calculated by the curvature change rate 86
4.3. What are the implications of the difference between satellite-based and multi-layer phenology 87
4.4. Limitations and implications for future studies 89
5. Conclusion 91
6. Appendix 92
Chapter 5. Conclusion 114
Abstract in Korean 115λ°
Evaluating solar-induced fluorescence across spatial and temporal scales to monitor primary productivity
Solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF) has been widely cited in carbon cycling studies as a proxy for photosynthesis, and SIF data are commonly incorporated into terrestrial primary productivity models. Though satellite-based SIF products show close relationships with gross primary productivity (GPP), this is not universally true at intermediate scales. A meta-analysis of the tower-based and airborne SIF literature revealed that mean SIF retrievals from unstressed vegetation span three orders of magnitude. While reporting on spectrometer calibration procedures, hardware characterizations, and associated corrections is inconsistent, laboratory and field experiments show that these factors may contribute to significant uncertainty in SIF retrievals. Additionally, there remain ongoing questions regarding the interpretation of SIF data made across spatial scales and the link between satellite SIF retrievals and primary productivity on the ground. Chlorophyll fluorescence originates from dynamic energy partitioning at the leaf level and does not exhibit a uniformly linear relationship with photosynthesis at finer scales. As a standalone metric, SIF measured at the tower scale was not found to track changes in carbon assimilation following stomatal closure induced in deciduous woody tree branches. This lack of relationship may be explained by alternative energy partitioning pathways, such as thermal energy dissipation mediated by xanthophyll cycle pigments; the activity of these pigments can be tracked using the photochemical reflectance index (PRI). Gradual, phenological changes in energy partitioning are observed as changes in the slope of the SIF-PRI relationship over the course of a season. Along with high frequency effects such as wind-mediated changes in leaf orientation and reflectance, and rapid changes in sky condition due to clouds, PRI offers crucial insights needed to link SIF to leaf physiology. While SIF offers tremendous promise for improving the characterization of terrestrial carbon exchange, and a fuller understanding of the boundaries on its utility and interpretation as a biophysical phenomenon will help to create more reliable models of global productivity