CORE
CO
nnecting
RE
positories
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Research partnership
About
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
Community governance
Governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
Innovations
Our research
Labs
research
Is productivity of mesic savannas light limited or water limited? Results of a simulation study
Authors
J Beringer
D Eamus
+6 more
LB Hutley
CMO Macinnis-Ng
D Taylor
RJ Whitley
M Williams
M Zeppel
Publication date
1 January 2011
Publisher
'Wiley'
Doi
Cite
Abstract
A soil-plant-atmosphere model was used to estimate gross primary productivity (GPP) and evapotranspiration (ET) of a tropical savanna in Australia. This paper describes model modifications required to simulate the substantial C4 grass understory together with C3 trees. The model was further improved to include a seasonal distribution of leaf area and foliar nitrogen through 10 canopy layers. Model outputs were compared with a 5-year eddy covariance dataset. Adding the C4 photosynthesis component improved the model efficiency and root-mean-squared error (RMSE) for total ecosystem GPP by better emulating annual peaks and troughs in GPP across wet and dry seasons. The C4 photosynthesis component had minimal impact on modelled values of ET. Outputs of GPP from the modified model agreed well with measured values, explaining between 79% and 90% of the variance and having a low RMSE (0.003-0.281gCm-2day-1). Approximately, 40% of total annual GPP was contributed by C4 grasses. Total (trees and grasses) wet season GPP was approximately 75-80% of total annual GPP. Light-use efficiency (LUE) was largest for the wet season and smallest in the dry season and C4 LUE was larger than that of the trees. A sensitivity analysis of GPP revealed that daily GPP was most sensitive to changes in leaf area index (LAI) and foliar nitrogen (Nf) and relatively insensitive to changes in maximum carboxylation rate (Vcmax), maximum electron transport rate (Jmax) and minimum leaf water potential (ψmin). The modified model was also able to represent daily and seasonal patterns in ET, (explaining 68-81% of variance) with a low RMSE (0.038-0.19mmday-1). Current values of Nf, LAI and other parameters appear to be colimiting for maximizing GPP. By manipulating LAI and soil moisture content inputs, we show that modelled GPP is limited by light interception rather than water availability at this site. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Similar works
Full text
Available Versions
OPUS - University of Technology Sydney
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:opus.lib.uts.edu.au:10453/...
Last time updated on 13/02/2017
Macquarie University ResearchOnline
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
Last time updated on 18/08/2016
Crossref
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
info:doi/10.1111%2Fj.1365-2486...
Last time updated on 01/04/2019
OPUS - University of Technology Sydney
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:opus.lib.uts.edu.au:10453/...
Last time updated on 13/02/2017