The sensitivity of carbon exchanges in Great Plains grasslands to precipitation variability

In the Great Plains, grassland carbon dynamics differ across broad gradients of precipitation and temperature, yet finer-scale variation in these variables may also affect grassland processes. Despite the importance of grasslands, there is little information on how fine-scale relationships compare between them regionally. We compared grassland C exchanges, energy partitioning and precipitation variability in eight sites in the eastern and western Great Plains using eddy covariance and meteorological data. During our study, both eastern and western grasslands varied between an average net carbon sink and a net source. Eastern grasslands had a moderate vapor pressure deficit (VPD = 0.95 kPa) and high growing season gross primary productivity (GPP = 1010 ± 218 g C m−2 yr−1). Western grasslands had a growing season with higher VPD (1.43 kPa) and lower GPP (360 ± 127 g C m−2 yr−1). Western grasslands were sensitive to precipitation at daily timescales, whereas eastern grasslands were sensitive at monthly and seasonal timescales. Our results support the expectation that C exchanges in these grasslands differ as a result of varying precipitation regimes. Because eastern grasslands are less influenced by short-term variability in rainfall than western grasslands, the effects of precipitation change are likely to be more predictable in eastern grasslands because the timescales of variability that must be resolved are relatively longer. We postulate increasing regional heterogeneity in grassland C exchanges in the Great Plains in coming decades.Konza Prairie Biological Station. Grant Number: DEB-0823341U.S. Department of Energy. Grant Number: DE-AC02-05CH11231U.S. Department of Agriculture. Grant Number: 2014-67003-22070DOE-NIGEC. Grant Number: 26-6223-7230-002Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Discovery. Grant Number: RGPIN-2014-05882Sevilleta LTERNAS

Rainfall Prediction in the State of Paraíba, Northeastern Brazil Using Generalized Additive Models

The state of Paraíba is part of the semi-arid region of Brazil, where severe droughts have occurred in recent years, resulting in significant socio-economic losses associated with climate variability. Thus, understanding to what extent precipitation can be influenced by sea surface temperature (SST) patterns in the tropical region can help, along with a monitoring system, to set up an early warning system, the first pillar in drought management. In this study, Generalized Additive Models for Location, Scale and Shape (GAMLSS) were used to filter climatic indices with higher predictive efficiency and, as a result, to perform rainfall predictions. The results show the persistent influence of tropical SST patterns in Paraíba rainfall, the tropical Atlantic Ocean impacting the rainfall distribution more effectively than the tropical Pacific Ocean. The GAMLSS model showed predictive capability during summer and southern autumn in Paraíba, highlighting the JFM (January, February and March), FMA (February, March and April), MAM (March, April and May), and AMJ (April, May and June) trimesters as those with the highest predictive potential. The methodology demonstrates the ability to be integrated with regional forecasting models (ensemble). Such information has the potential to inform decisions in multiple sectors, such as agriculture and water resources, aiming at the sustainable management of water resources and resilience to climate risk

Whitepaper: Understanding land-atmosphere interactions through tower-based flux and continuous atmospheric boundary layer measurements

Executive summary ● Target audience: AmeriFlux community, AmeriFlux Science Steering Committee & Department of Energy (DOE) program managers [ARM/ASR (atmosphere), TES (surface), and SBR (subsurface)] ● Problem statement: The atmospheric boundary layer mediates the exchange of energy and matter between the land surface and the free troposphere integrating a range of physical, chemical, and biological processes. However, continuous atmospheric boundary layer observations at AmeriFlux sites are still scarce. How can adding measurements of the atmospheric boundary layer enhance the scientific value of the AmeriFlux network? ● Research opportunities: We highlight four key opportunities to integrate tower-based flux measurements with continuous, long-term atmospheric boundary layer measurements: (1) to interpret surface flux and atmospheric boundary layer exchange dynamics at flux tower sites, (2) to support regionalscale modeling and upscaling of surface fluxes to continental scales, (3) to validate land-atmosphere coupling in Earth system models, and (4) to support flux footprint modelling, the interpretation of surface fluxes in heterogeneous terrain, and quality control of eddy covariance flux measurements. ● Recommended actions: Adding a suite of atmospheric boundary layer measurements to eddy covariance flux tower sites would allow the Earth science community to address new emerging research questions, to better interpret ongoing flux tower measurements, and would present novel opportunities for collaboration between AmeriFlux scientists and atmospheric and remote sensing scientists. We therefore recommend that (1) a set of instrumentation for continuous atmospheric boundary layer observations be added to a subset of AmeriFlux sites spanning a range of ecosystem types and climate zones, that (2) funding agencies (e.g., Department of Energy, NASA) solicit research on land-atmosphere processes where the benefits of fully integrated atmospheric boundary layer observations can add value to key scientific questions, and that (3) the AmeriFlux Management Project acquires loaner instrumentation for atmospheric boundary layer observations for use in experiments and short-term duration campaigns

ECOSTRESS: NASA's next generation mission to measure evapotranspiration from the International Space Station

The ECOsystem Spaceborne Thermal Radiometer Experiment on Space Station ECOSTRESS) was launched to the International Space Station on June 29, 2018. The primary science focus of ECOSTRESS is centered on evapotranspiration (ET), which is produced as level‐3 (L3) latent heat flux (LE) data products. These data are generated from the level‐2 land surface temperature and emissivity product (L2_LSTE), in conjunction with ancillary surface and atmospheric data. Here, we provide the first validation (Stage 1, preliminary) of the global ECOSTRESS clear‐sky ET product (L3_ET_PT‐JPL, version 6.0) against LE measurements at 82 eddy covariance sites around the world. Overall, the ECOSTRESS ET product performs well against the site measurements (clear‐sky instantaneous/time of overpass: r2 = 0.88; overall bias = 8%; normalized RMSE = 6%). ET uncertainty was generally consistent across climate zones, biome types, and times of day (ECOSTRESS samples the diurnal cycle), though temperate sites are over‐represented. The 70 m high spatial resolution of ECOSTRESS improved correlations by 85%, and RMSE by 62%, relative to 1 km pixels. This paper serves as a reference for the ECOSTRESS L3 ET accuracy and Stage 1 validation status for subsequent science that follows using these data

Representativeness of Eddy-Covariance flux footprints for areas surrounding AmeriFlux sites

Large datasets of greenhouse gas and energy surface-atmosphere fluxes measured with the eddy-covariance technique (e.g., FLUXNET2015, AmeriFlux BASE) are widely used to benchmark models and remote-sensing products. This study addresses one of the major challenges facing model-data integration: To what spatial extent do flux measurements taken at individual eddy-covariance sites reflect model- or satellite-based grid cells? We evaluate flux footprints—the temporally dynamic source areas that contribute to measured fluxes—and the representativeness of these footprints for target areas (e.g., within 250–3000 m radii around flux towers) that are often used in flux-data synthesis and modeling studies. We examine the land-cover composition and vegetation characteristics, represented here by the Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI), in the flux footprints and target areas across 214 AmeriFlux sites, and evaluate potential biases as a consequence of the footprint-to-target-area mismatch. Monthly 80% footprint climatologies vary across sites and through time ranging four orders of magnitude from 103 to 107 m2 due to the measurement heights, underlying vegetation- and ground-surface characteristics, wind directions, and turbulent state of the atmosphere. Few eddy-covariance sites are located in a truly homogeneous landscape. Thus, the common model-data integration approaches that use a fixed-extent target area across sites introduce biases on the order of 4%–20% for EVI and 6%–20% for the dominant land cover percentage. These biases are site-specific functions of measurement heights, target area extents, and land-surface characteristics. We advocate that flux datasets need to be used with footprint awareness, especially in research and applications that benchmark against models and data products with explicit spatial information. We propose a simple representativeness index based on our evaluations that can be used as a guide to identify site-periods suitable for specific applications and to provide general guidance for data use