Geology topics

David Hollinger

Publications and source records attributed to David Hollinger.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2021

FLUXNET-CH4: A global, multi-ecosystem database and analysis of methane seasonality from freshwater wetlands

Methane (CH 4 ) emissions from natural landscapes constitute roughly half of global CH 4 contributions to the atmosphere, yet large uncertainties remain in the absolute magnitude and the seasonality of emission quantities and drivers. Eddy covariance (EC) measurements of CH 4 flux are ideal for constraining ecosystem-scale CH 4 emissions due to quasi-continuous and high-temporal-resolution CH 4 flux measurements, coincident carbon dioxide, water, and energy flux measurements, lack of ecosystem disturbance, and increased availability of datasets over the last decade. Here, we (1) describe the newly published dataset, FLUXNET-CH 4 Version 1.0, the first open-source global dataset of CH 4 EC measurements (available at https://fluxnet.org/data/fluxnet-ch4-community-product/ , last access: 7 April 2021). FLUXNET-CH 4 includes half-hourly and daily gap-filled and non-gap-filled aggregated CH 4 fluxes and meteorological data from 79 sites globally: 42 freshwater wetlands, 6 brackish and saline wetlands, 7 formerly drained ecosystems, 7 rice paddy sites, 2 lakes, and 15 uplands. Then, we (2) evaluate FLUXNET-CH 4 representativeness for freshwater wetland coverage globally because the majority of sites in FLUXNET-CH 4 Version 1.0 are freshwater wetlands which are a substantial source of total atmospheric CH 4 emissions; and (3) we provide the first global estimates of the seasonal variability and seasonality predictors of freshwater wetland CH 4 fluxes. Our representativeness analysis suggests that the freshwater wetland sites in the dataset cover global wetland bioclimatic attributes (encompassing energy, moisture, and vegetation-related parameters) in arctic, boreal, and temperate regions but only sparsely cover humid tropical regions. Seasonality metrics of wetland CH 4 emissions vary considerably across latitudinal bands. In freshwater wetlands (except those between 20 ∘ S to 20 ∘ N) the spring onset of elevated CH 4 emissions starts 3 d earlier, and the CH 4 emission season lasts 4 d longer, for each degree Celsius increase in mean annual air temperature. On average, the spring onset of increasing CH 4 emissions lags behind soil warming by 1 month, with very few sites experiencing increased CH 4 emissions prior to the onset of soil warming. In contrast, roughly half of these sites experience the spring onset of rising CH 4 emissions prior to the spring increase in gross primary productivity (GPP). The timing of peak summer CH 4 emissions does not correlate with the timing for either peak summer temperature or peak GPP. Our results provide seasonality parameters for CH 4 modeling and highlight seasonality metrics that cannot be predicted by temperature or GPP (i.e., seasonality of CH 4 peak). FLUXNET-CH 4 is a powerful new resource for diagnosing and understanding the role of terrestrial ecosystems and climate drivers in the global CH 4 cycle, and future additions of sites in tropical ecosystems and site years of data collection will provide added value to this database. All seasonality parameters are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4672601 (Delwiche et al., 2021). Additionally, raw FLUXNET-CH 4 data used to extract seasonality parameters can be downloaded from https://fluxnet.org/data/fluxnet-ch4-community-product/ (last access: 7 April 2021), and a complete list of the 79 individual site data DOIs is provided in Table 2 of this paper.

Earth System Science Data↗

USGS2018

New England and northern New York forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: A report from the New England Climate Change Response Framework project

Forest ecosystems will face direct and indirect impacts from a changing climate over the 21st century. This assessment evaluates the vulnerability of forest ecosystems across the New England region (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, northern New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont) under a range of future climates. We synthesized and summarized information on the contemporary landscape, provided information on past climate trends, and described a range of projected future climates. This information was used to parameterize and run multiple vegetation impact models, which provided a range of potential vegetative responses to climate. Finally, we brought these results before a multidisciplinary panel of scientists and natural resource professionals familiar with the forests of this region to assess ecosystem vulnerability through a formal consensus-based expert elicitation process. Observed trends in climate over the historical record from 1901 through 2011 show that the mean annual temperature has increased across the region by 2.4 °F, with even greater warming during winter. Precipitation patterns also changed during this time, with a slight trend toward greater annual precipitation and a substantial increase in extreme precipitation events. Projected climate trends using downscaled global climate model data indicate a potential increase in mean annual temperature of 3 to 8 °F for the assessment area by 2100. Projections for precipitation indicate an increase in fall and winter precipitation, and spring and summer precipitation projections vary by scenario. We identified potential impacts on forests by incorporating these future climate projections into three forest impact models (DISTRIB, LINKAGES, and LANDIS PRO). Model projections suggest that many northern and boreal species, including balsam fir, red spruce, and black spruce, may fare worse under future conditions, but other species may benefit from projected changes in climate. Published literature on climate impacts related to wildfire, invasive species, and forest pests and diseases also contributed to the overall determination of climate change vulnerability. We assessed vulnerability for eight forest communities in the assessment area. The assessment was conducted through a formal elicitation process with 20 scientists and resource managers from across the area, who considered vulnerability in terms of the potential impacts and the adaptive capacity for an individual community. Montane spruce-fir, low-elevation spruce-fir, and lowland mixed conifer forests were determined to be the most vulnerable communities. Central hardwoods, transition hardwoods, and pitch pine-scrub oak forests were perceived as having lower vulnerability to projected changes in climate. These projected changes in climate and the associated impacts and vulnerabilities will have important implications for economically valuable timber species, forest-dependent animals and plants, recreation, and long-term natural resource planning.

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, ↗

USGS2011

Characterizing the performance of ecosystem models across time scales: A spectral analysis of the North American Carbon Program site‐level synthesis

[1] 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.

Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences↗

USGS2010

A model‐data intercomparison of CO2 exchange across North America: Results from the North American Carbon Program site synthesis

Our current understanding of terrestrial carbon processes is represented in various models used to integrate and scale measurements of CO 2 exchange from remote sensing and other spatiotemporal data. Yet assessments are rarely conducted to determine how well models simulate carbon processes across vegetation types and environmental conditions. Using standardized data from the North American Carbon Program we compare observed and simulated monthly CO 2 exchange from 44 eddy covariance flux towers in North America and 22 terrestrial biosphere models. The analysis period spans ∼220 site‐years, 10 biomes, and includes two large‐scale drought events, providing a natural experiment to evaluate model skill as a function of drought and seasonality. We evaluate models' ability to simulate the seasonal cycle of CO 2 exchange using multiple model skill metrics and analyze links between model characteristics, site history, and model skill. Overall model performance was poor; the difference between observations and simulations was ∼10 times observational uncertainty, with forested ecosystems better predicted than nonforested. Model‐data agreement was highest in summer and in temperate evergreen forests. In contrast, model performance declined in spring and fall, especially in ecosystems with large deciduous components, and in dry periods during the growing season. Models used across multiple biomes and sites, the mean model ensemble, and a model using assimilated parameter values showed high consistency with observations. Models with the highest skill across all biomes all used prescribed canopy phenology, calculated NEE as the difference between GPP and ecosystem respiration, and did not use a daily time step.

Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences↗